[Geoserver-devel] [WFSBasic.Users] [Geotools-devel] Versioning WFS-T and protocol extensions

mikel.maron · November 29, 2006, 11:54am

The whole object must be passed in. Omitting tags within the object is effectively a delete.
Yes there's some redundancies here, but it keeps it simple.

----- Original Message ----
From: Chris Holmes <cholmes@anonymised.com>
To: mikel.maron@anonymised.com
Cc: Raj Singh <rsingh@anonymised.com>; Jo Walsh <jo@anonymised.com>; Geoserver-devel <geoserver-devel@lists.sourceforge.net>; wfsbasic.users@anonymised.com; Geotools-Devel list <geotools-devel@lists.sourceforge.net>
Sent: Tuesday, November 28, 2006 4:40:53 PM
Subject: Re: [WFSBasic.Users] [Geotools-devel] Versioning WFS-T and protocol extensions

PUT
Simply pass in a chunk of XML, and that object is updated.

Wait, can you just pass in part of the node/segment/ect. ? Or do you
have to pass the whole thing in? The api notes aren't super clear.

Like if I already have <tag k="name" v="Camden Road"/> can I do a put
with only: <tag k="name" v="Camdin Road"/> and it will update?

Or do I have to do the whole:

to get it to update?

If there's a way to just pass in an attribute and have that update then
you could combine insert and update more efficiently. Though you'd also
need a way to do an update that allows you to remove a tag/attribute.

Chris

DELETE
Just pass in the id

To me, standardization doesn't seem much more complicated than adding the Atom Publishing Protocol on top of WFS Simple

----- Original Message ----
From: Raj Singh <rsingh@anonymised.com>
To: Jo Walsh <jo@anonymised.com>
Cc: Chris Holmes <cholmes@anonymised.com>; Geoserver-devel <geoserver-devel@anonymised.comts.sourceforge.net>; wfsbasic.users@anonymised.com; Geotools-Devel list <geotools-devel@lists.sourceforge.net>; mikel.maron@anonymised.com
Sent: Tuesday, November 28, 2006 5:35:11 AM
Subject: Re: [WFSBasic.Users] [Geotools-devel] Versioning WFS-T and protocol extensions

I kind of agree with Chris. To do transactions right moves out of
Simple land. Once you want to update or edit a data set you need to
know all kinds of things about the structure of that data. Not to
mention the other issues. Maybe openstreetmap people could offer some
advice?
---
Raj

On Nov 27, 2006, at 7:15 PM, Jo Walsh wrote:

On Mon, Nov 27, 2006 at 06:37:16PM -0500, Chris Holmes wrote:

I would love it if we could include our ideas on transactions and
versioning and the like in WFS-Simple, but unfortunately I do fear
that
when you get in to transactions, authentication, and versioning
you're
no longer in 'simple' land (indeed I myself might argue against their
place in a simple spec).

Then 'Simple' is kind of a misnomer. 'Basic' was the original name,
right? I would have thought being able to write a feature to a web
feature service was a fairly basic operation

You don't need much of the rest of WFS, right, to do Transactions?
Like Filter support and POST queries, GML comprehension and emission,
all these non-Simple things. The question is not "why should it be
WFS-T" but "why shouldn't it also be this other, kind of WFS-like
thing"

!DSPAM:1003,456c34bf61471995013331!

--
Chris Holmes
The Open Planning Project
http://topp.openplans.org

begin:vcard
fn:Chris Holmes
n:Holmes;Chris
org:The Open Planning Project
adr:;;377 Broadway, 11th Floor;New York;NY;10013;USA
email;internet:cholmes@anonymised.com
title:VP, Strategic Development
x-mozilla-html:FALSE
url:http://topp.openplans.org
version:2.1
end:vcard