[ZOO-Discuss] Fwd: [WPS-2.0.SWG] Fwd: Re: WPS Interoperability

[Guillaume Sueur]

Guys,

I forward you that message from OGC WPS 2.0 SWG which can be interesting 
to get zoo project involved in WPS 2.0

Regards

Guillaume

-------- Message original --------
Sujet: [WPS-2.0.SWG] Fwd: Re: WPS Interoperability
Date : Tue, 21 Sep 2010 19:29:34 +0200
De : Bastian Schäffer <schaeffer at uni-muenster.de>
Pour : WPS 2.0 SWG <wps-2.0.swg at lists.opengeospatial.org>

WPS Experts,

if you are a WPS implementor, you might want to contribute to the
collection of best practice (see message below) in order create solid
ground for WPS 2.0.

-------- Original-Nachricht --------
Betreff: Re: [WPS-dev] WPS Interoperability
Datum: Tue, 21 Sep 2010 19:27:02 +0200
Von: Bastian Schäffer <schaeffer at uni-muenster.de>
An: wps-dev at lists.opengeospatial.org
CC: Dr. Christian Kiehle <kiehle at lat-lon.de>

List,

I recognized that some of you have already added some information on the
twiki:
http://external.opengeospatial.org/twiki_public/bin/view/WPS/InteroperabilityIssues

Great.

In order to collect best practice, it might be helpfull to document what
is best practice in your community for the following cases:

generic Input or application schema GML2
generic Input or application schema GML3
Input Geotiff
Input shapefiles
<please add your format>

what are the accepted values for:
- schema
- mimeType
- encoding

how does the actual payload look like,
e.g. GML feature collection (with wfs namespace or gml namespace),
gmlobject etc.. You name it.

There is no right and no wrong. Just best practice in your community.

Regards,
Bastian Schäffer



Am 13.09.2010 17:12, schrieb Bastian Schäffer:
> List,
>
> I attended last week the FOSS4G in Barcelona. Even though this
> conference is mostly focused on OpenSource, there was a huge interest in
> WPS. About 8 presentations, 2 Workshops and a tutorial.
>
> WPS is gaining momentum.
>
> Due to that large momentum, a WPS special interest group gathered to
> discuss interoperability issues. Especially the specification of GML
> input seems to be a problem which hinders interoperability.
>
> Further discussion will take place over this public discussion list here
> and the public twiki:
> http://external.opengeospatial.org/twiki_public/bin/view/WPS/WebHome
>
> One of the first things will be to collect current best practices about
> how to define GML input.
>
> So if you are a WPS vendor/community, please add some details to the twiki:
> http://external.opengeospatial.org/twiki_public/bin/view/WPS/InteroperabilityIssues
>
> Regards,
> Bastian Schäffer
>
>
>
>