NOTE: The galeon mailing list is no longer active. The list archives are made available for historical reasons.
Dominic Lowe wrote:
Hi Jon, All,I don't know if considering profiles of extensions is just complicating theissue though...I think the reality of the core + extensions approach means that we will *have* to agree on supported combinations of extensions to achieve interoperability. i.e. agree to provide a WCS service which consists of:Core + ExtensionA + ExtensionD and ExtensionFSo in that sense I think we need community profiles of WCS, but if it becomes necessary to profile an individual extension (which is what I think you are implying?), then I think the extension probably needs breaking down into simpler more modular extensions.i.e. I don't think we should be trying to define how to do interpolation or subsampling within the WCS_NetCDF extension*. Interpolation should be a separate extension.i.e. it would be good to have this model: Core + WCS_NetCDF + Interpolation Rather than this one: Core + WCS_InterpolationProfileofNetCDFIf the WCSNetCDF extension is in itself too complicated to implement (fully) then that probably needs addressing at this stage before it becomes an official OGC document.Cheers, Dom *we're not, this was just an example!
Seems ok, though Im never sure of the real implications until ive seen some concrete examples or implementations. The thrust of my comments is to give us permission to solve all of the various issues we need to make a viable server for our community. If I understand correctly, core + extensions trades interoperability for this possibility. There is still a hope that core + say, geotiff would be a good LCD (lowest common denominator) to strive for.
galeon archives: