[ZOO-Discuss] GRASS WPS Process Description

[Soeren Gebbert]

Hello Gérald,
sorry for the delay, i am currently very busy.

2009/11/28 Gérald Fenoy <gerald.fenoy at geolabs.fr>:
> Hi Soeren,
> I made lot of mistake in my previous mail, maybe I had to sleep before
> answering but I tried to be reactive and this imply I was wrong. Hope you
> all will forgive.

No problem at all. It was a good opportunity for me to validate my
implementation
and i found indeed several erros. So thanks for your mail. :)
Feedback is always important.

I hope to start the implementation of the grass Python module soon.
So we are able to implement some grass services in the zoo-project.

Best regards
Soeren

> Le 28 nov. 2009 à 00:12, Soeren Gebbert a écrit :
>
> Hello Gerald,
> thanks for your post. It is really important for me that a WPS expert
> has a look on the generated XML documents.
> I am still a bloody beginner at this topic.
>
> The XML output of grass should be WPS 1.0.0 compatible.
> I am using the OGC WPS 1.0.0 xsd files for validation and the WPS
> 1.0.0 OGC report number 05-007r07.
>
> 2009/11/28 Gérald Fenoy <gerald.fenoy at geolabs.fr>:
>
> Hi Markus,
>
> nice to hear from you again.
>
> There is something in the DescribeProcess which make me wondering if I'm
>
> wrong or miss something (or maybe the last version of WPS proposal ??). Why
>
> was ComplexOutput used where ComplexData should be used ?
>
> Table 46 of the WPS proposal define the Data structure and seems to define
>
> that we have to use ComplexData rather than ComplexOutput.
>
> ComplexData is used within Input description and ComplexOutput is used
> in Output description.
> The XML file within the mail of Markus is only a part of a more
> complex XML file.
> The last ComplexOutput is part of an Output description. Well,
> ComplexOutput is indeed of data type ComplexData (see table 36) but
> you have to name it ComplexOutput in case of an Output.
>
>
> You're right, but this still sounds odd to me. Indeed as the ComplexData is
> already in an Output node I wonder why the XML differ between the Input and
> the Output. ZOO Kernel currently use the same ComplexData or LiteralData for
> both Input and Output. Nevertheless this can be easily corrected.
>
> But besides of that, there are several bugs in this XML document.
> Several tags are wrong do to my function renaming yesterday:
> </process_outputs>
> </process_description>
> </wps:process_descriptions>
> ...
>
> I have fixed this in grass7 svn to provide conform WPS XML support.
> The validation tool i use, which validates the XML files against the
> OGC xsd files,
> says everything is correct now.
>
> Furthermore, you use a node for MimeType, I've understood that in the WPS
>
> proposal, when they use the first letter capitalized that means that we have
>
> to use a node. But for mimeType it was specified as-is, so I'm pretty sure
>
> that it have to be used as an attribute of the ComplexData node. Please
>
> correct me if I'm wrong.
>
> The MimeType should be a separate element within the Format element in
> ComplexData, see table 23 in OGC 07-007r07 document.
>
> Have a look at the reference example:
> http://schemas.opengis.net/wps/1.0.0/examples/40_wpsDescribeProcess_response.xml
>
> Yes, another time, you're totaly right Soeren, I made a mistake, in fact
> even the ZOO Kernel provide such a node :]
>
> Maybe that's why we have to create a parser to be able to use the
>
> DescribeProcess as source for creating the zcfg file which specify the
>
> process' metadata.
>
> Nope. The WPS output generated by grass must be WPS 1.0.0 compatibel,
> everything else is not acceptable.
> In case you or somebody else will find incompatibilities, i will fix
> it as fast as i can.
>
>
> Ok that's sound good to me.
>
> Best regards
> Soeren
>
>
> Thanks a lot to keep in touch,
> kind regards,
> Good Tabaski guys ! :)
>
> Djay
> Just a ZOO Monkey in Dakar
> gerald.fenoy at geolabs.fr
>