Fwd: [WCS.RWG] Multipart MIME as Coverage Response?

• To: "Unidata GALEON" <galeon@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
• Subject: Fwd: [WCS.RWG] Multipart MIME as Coverage Response?
• From: "Ben Domenico" <Ben@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
• Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2007 10:14:07 -0600

Hello,

Below is an interaction on the WCS.RWG email list that seems very
relevant to  GALEON Phase 2.  It appears that the WCS 1.1
specification requires some form of XML metadata as well as the binary
encoded data in the getCoverage response. Several of the WCS 1.0
clients and servers in GALEON Phase 1 did not include the XML
metadata.


-- Ben


---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Wenli Yang <yang@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Jun 26, 2007 9:05 AM
Subject: Re: [WCS.RWG] Multipart MIME as Coverage Response?
To: Frank Warmerdam <warmerdam@xxxxxxxxx>, Dominic Lowe <d.lowe@xxxxxxxx>
Cc: wcs-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, wcs.rwg@xxxxxxxxxxx

I had raised this question a couple of weeks ago and Peter Baumann responded.

The current spec allows the following responses:
1. XML response with coverage data attached
2. XML response without coverage data attached (i.e., coverage data conbe
obtained from URLs included in the xml)
3. SOAP response with coverage data attached
4. SOAP response without coverage data attached (i.e., coverage data conbe
obtained from URLs included in the xml)

In any of these cases, a client won't be able to get just the coverage data
(i.e., decoding of xml, either with or without soap, is needed).  I think
that direct response of ONLY coverage data does have its use case.  For
example, an application software can directly open the response as a remote
file.  The issue is that metadata cannot be attached.  If the coverage data
follows a well defined profile, this may not be a problem.


Wenli