Hi,
one request that keeps on popping up, and that is afaik also being considered in WPS 2.0,
is the ability to cancel a process executing in asynchronous mode.
So I would like to add the operation in the most obvious way:
Hi,
one request that keeps on popping up, and that is afaik also being considered in WPS 2.0,
is the ability to cancel a process executing in asynchronous mode.
So I would like to add the operation in the most obvious way:
“Accelerate Dev Cycles with Automated Cross-Browser Testing - For FREE
Instantly run your Selenium tests across 300+ browser/OS combos.
Get unparalleled scalability from the best Selenium testing platform available
Simple to use. Nothing to install. Get started now for free.” http://p.sf.net/sfu/SauceLabs
On Wed, May 21, 2014 at 3:55 PM, Jody Garnett <jody.garnett@anonymised.com>wrote:
Boundless is a member so I should be able to get a copy, I am not
completely sure I am set up.
I recommend asking on standards@anonymised.com for an example of cancel.
Good call, I got a copy of the drafts asking there (a copy that I cannot
divulge, sorry).
Anyways, things are pretty similar to the one I've shared, the one
difference is that the
Cancel response is the same as a Execute one, just with a different end
state (and the
name of the operation might be different in the future).
Given that the status of the spec is still floating, I guess I'll go ahead
with the
one I've proposed, with a Execute style response.
Given the amount of changes in WPS 2.0 I guess some WFS style treatment of
the
request will be in order anyways (that is, rolling adapters to get a
unified vision of
the two different protocols).
Cheers
Andrea
--
Meet us at GEO Business 2014! in London! Visit http://goo.gl/fES3aK
for more information.
Ing. Andrea Aime @geowolf
Technical Lead
GeoSolutions S.A.S.
Via Poggio alle Viti 1187
55054 Massarosa (LU)
Italy
phone: +39 0584 962313
fax: +39 0584 1660272
mob: +39 339 8844549