I am looking at integrating GWC support into the MapML Community Module. The idea would be that if you install the module, you would be able to use GWC cached/cacheable layers as MapML content i.e. the tile URLs would be referenced by their row/column cache values.
It currently works pretty well. I am trying to integrate MapML as a FeatureInfo optional format, and this is what my question is about.
I was wondering what an appropriate way to deal with this is. I don’t know if its right to want to query the WMS for all the info formats available and include them, that might generate too many featureinfo elements. On the other hand, it’s not right to hard code text/mapml as a gwc info format, because that means the MapML Community Module must be installed for that not to cause errors on the geoserver side.
Would a spring bean configuration approach be appropriate? What would you like to see in that?
Thanks for your thoughts. If there’s some agreement, I would write up a GSIP or GWCIP if appropriate.
I could just ignore the issue and use the GetFeatureInfo against a WMS request for the bounds of the tile in question, not a WMTS GetFeatureInfo request, but then text/mapml format doesn’t show up in the WMTS capabilities, which would be nice for those who install the module.
OK, I just submitted a pull request for this addition, because I built GeoServer without the MapML module and the text/mapml format does not show up in the capabilities. It’s apparent that it was designed to get the info formats from the WMS and check if they exist in the GeoWebCache MimeType definition. Given that with the MapML module installed, the WMS will have the text/mapml format defined, that format shows up appropriately in the GWC WMTS capabilities document.
Seems like it will work.
Let me know if there’s something that needs attention!
Thank you
Peter
I am looking at integrating GWC support into the MapML Community Module. The idea would be that if you install the module, you would be able to use GWC cached/cacheable layers as MapML content i.e. the tile URLs would be referenced by their row/column cache values.
It currently works pretty well. I am trying to integrate MapML as a FeatureInfo optional format, and this is what my question is about.
I was wondering what an appropriate way to deal with this is. I don’t know if its right to want to query the WMS for all the info formats available and include them, that might generate too many featureinfo elements. On the other hand, it’s not right to hard code text/mapml as a gwc info format, because that means the MapML Community Module must be installed for that not to cause errors on the geoserver side.
Would a spring bean configuration approach be appropriate? What would you like to see in that?
Thanks for your thoughts. If there’s some agreement, I would write up a GSIP or GWCIP if appropriate.
I could just ignore the issue and use the GetFeatureInfo against a WMS request for the bounds of the tile in question, not a WMTS GetFeatureInfo request, but then text/mapml format doesn’t show up in the WMTS capabilities, which would be nice for those who install the module.
Yes, what Chris merged and this request go together, although because they’re separate projects I needed to submit separate pull requests. Chris doesn’t have committer rights on GeoWebCache, so we still need someone to look at and merge this request: https://github.com/GeoWebCache/geowebcache/pull/781
OK, I just submitted a pull request for this addition, because I built GeoServer without the MapML module and the text/mapml format does not show up in the capabilities. It’s apparent that it was designed to get the info formats from the WMS and check if they exist in the GeoWebCache MimeType definition. Given that with the MapML module installed, the WMS will have the text/mapml format defined, that format shows up appropriately in the GWC WMTS capabilities document.
Seems like it will work.
Let me know if there’s something that needs attention!
Thank you
Peter
I am looking at integrating GWC support into the MapML Community Module. The idea would be that if you install the module, you would be able to use GWC cached/cacheable layers as MapML content i.e. the tile URLs would be referenced by their row/column cache values.
It currently works pretty well. I am trying to integrate MapML as a FeatureInfo optional format, and this is what my question is about.
I was wondering what an appropriate way to deal with this is. I don’t know if its right to want to query the WMS for all the info formats available and include them, that might generate too many featureinfo elements. On the other hand, it’s not right to hard code text/mapml as a gwc info format, because that means the MapML Community Module must be installed for that not to cause errors on the geoserver side.
Would a spring bean configuration approach be appropriate? What would you like to see in that?
Thanks for your thoughts. If there’s some agreement, I would write up a GSIP or GWCIP if appropriate.
I could just ignore the issue and use the GetFeatureInfo against a WMS request for the bounds of the tile in question, not a WMTS GetFeatureInfo request, but then text/mapml format doesn’t show up in the WMTS capabilities, which would be nice for those who install the module.