After the change to the metadata URL back links (GEOS-5167, GEOS-5219), it is possible to use a URI instead of a full URL. I know this was implemented for cite purposes but it is also be a useful feature. One could put in /path/to/metadata in the web UI (or via REST) and in the capabilities response the URL would be http://proxy-url/path/to/metadata. This is really handy in the case where you have different stages of production servers (alpha, beta, production). The metadata URLs would not have to be changed by hand for each layer.
The only thing preventing this use case is the URL validation of the web UI. Would there be any negative impact to changing this to URI validation or changing the URL validation to allow no protocol/host/port?
Thanks,
Michael
I personally have no objection in relaxing the URL validation done in
the UI. What if instead of a hard validation that prevents submitting
the form, we just show a small warning message when the metadata URL
text field loses focus (i.e. perform the validation through an ajax
call).
disclaimer: some of all of the above may be pure non sense.
On Wed, Jul 25, 2012 at 9:15 PM, Michael Romero
<mromero@anonymised.com> wrote:
After the change to the metadata URL back links (GEOS-5167, GEOS-5219),
it is possible to use a URI instead of a full URL. I know this was
implemented for cite purposes but it is also be a useful feature. One
could put in /path/to/metadata in the web UI (or via REST) and in the
capabilities response the URL would be
http://proxy-url/path/to/metadata. This is really handy in the case
where you have different stages of production servers (alpha, beta,
production). The metadata URLs would not have to be changed by hand for
each layer.
The only thing preventing this use case is the URL validation of the web
UI. Would there be any negative impact to changing this to URI
validation or changing the URL validation to allow no protocol/host/port?
Thanks,
Michael
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Live Security Virtual Conference
Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and
threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions
will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware
threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/
_______________________________________________
Geoserver-devel mailing list
Geoserver-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geoserver-devel
--
Gabriel Roldan
OpenGeo - http://opengeo.org
Expert service straight from the developers.
Nope, this makes sense. Actually the schema requires just a uri, not a url so it should be perfectly valid to do this. ANy interest in taking this one on Michael?
On Wed, Jul 25, 2012 at 9:16 PM, Gabriel Roldan <groldan@anonymised.com> wrote:
I personally have no objection in relaxing the URL validation done in
the UI. What if instead of a hard validation that prevents submitting
the form, we just show a small warning message when the metadata URL
text field loses focus (i.e. perform the validation through an ajax
call).
disclaimer: some of all of the above may be pure non sense.
On Wed, Jul 25, 2012 at 9:15 PM, Michael Romero
<mromero@anonymised.com> wrote:
After the change to the metadata URL back links (GEOS-5167, GEOS-5219),
it is possible to use a URI instead of a full URL. I know this was
implemented for cite purposes but it is also be a useful feature. One
could put in /path/to/metadata in the web UI (or via REST) and in the
capabilities response the URL would be
http://proxy-url/path/to/metadata. This is really handy in the case
where you have different stages of production servers (alpha, beta,
production). The metadata URLs would not have to be changed by hand for
each layer.
The only thing preventing this use case is the URL validation of the web
UI. Would there be any negative impact to changing this to URI
validation or changing the URL validation to allow no protocol/host/port?
Thanks,
Michael
Live Security Virtual Conference
Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today’s security and
threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions
will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware
threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/
Geoserver-devel mailing list
Geoserver-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geoserver-devel
–
Gabriel Roldan
OpenGeo - http://opengeo.org
Expert service straight from the developers.
Live Security Virtual Conference
Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today’s security and
threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions
will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware
threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/
Geoserver-devel mailing list
Geoserver-devel@anonymised.comsts.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geoserver-devel
–
Justin Deoliveira
OpenGeo - http://opengeo.org
Enterprise support for open source geospatial.
Yeah I can tackle this. I’m thinking the warning Gabriel mentioned but only if the field value is not a full URL and the proxy URL is not set. This would result in an inaccessible URL in the capabilities response.
Michael
On Jul 26, 2012, at 6:28 AM, “Justin Deoliveira” <jdeolive@anonymised.com> wrote:
Nope, this makes sense. Actually the schema requires just a uri, not a url so it should be perfectly valid to do this. ANy interest in taking this one on Michael?
On Wed, Jul 25, 2012 at 9:16 PM, Gabriel Roldan <groldan@anonymised.com…> wrote:
I personally have no objection in relaxing the URL validation done in
the UI. What if instead of a hard validation that prevents submitting
the form, we just show a small warning message when the metadata URL
text field loses focus (i.e. perform the validation through an ajax
call).
disclaimer: some of all of the above may be pure non sense.
On Wed, Jul 25, 2012 at 9:15 PM, Michael Romero
<mromero@anonymised.com> wrote:
After the change to the metadata URL back links (GEOS-5167, GEOS-5219),
it is possible to use a URI instead of a full URL. I know this was
implemented for cite purposes but it is also be a useful feature. One
could put in /path/to/metadata in the web UI (or via REST) and in the
capabilities response the URL would be
http://proxy-url/path/to/metadata. This is really handy in the case
where you have different stages of production servers (alpha, beta,
production). The metadata URLs would not have to be changed by hand for
each layer.
The only thing preventing this use case is the URL validation of the web
UI. Would there be any negative impact to changing this to URI
validation or changing the URL validation to allow no protocol/host/port?
Thanks,
Michael
Live Security Virtual Conference
Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today’s security and
threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions
will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware
threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/
Geoserver-devel mailing list
Geoserver-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geoserver-devel
–
Gabriel Roldan
OpenGeo - http://opengeo.org
Expert service straight from the developers.
Live Security Virtual Conference
Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today’s security and
threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions
will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware
threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/
Geoserver-devel mailing list
Geoserver-devel@anonymised.comsts.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geoserver-devel
–
Justin Deoliveira
OpenGeo - http://opengeo.org
Enterprise support for open source geospatial.