NOTE: The galeon mailing list is no longer active. The list archives are made available for historical reasons.
Hi John, Yes the core defines the structure of getCoverage response but it is still not finalized. I believe the following two parts are widely accepted as needing to be included in the WCS SWG: a) SOAP wrapped XML b) reference(s) to the actual coverage file(s)WCS1.1.x does not require SOAP. It is now suggested that SOAP envelope to be added because it should not add much effort for people not using SOAP. For the coverage data, there discussions, including using multipart message, SOAP with attachment, and reference(s) to "stored" file(s).
In addition, a file-only response as in WCS1.0.0 for KVP request is also valid. This is also not finalized but I believe this will be accepted. I myself is a supporter of keeping this option. My primary reason is that many users will like the simplicity of getting a coverage into their application software, such as GrADS, by just typing in a request URL. The main reason people don't think it being very useful is that a user needs to know OGC stuff (e.g., getCapabilities, describeCOverage, CSW) in order to formulate the request URL. As to GML, GeoTiff, etc, I don't think any of the encoding format (profile) is included in core. I myself don't think it's possible to force a universal format encoding profile, given the perspective of very different user communities. For extension limit, I think that there is none for format encoding (i.e., anybody can propose any profile as long as he/she thinks there is user base). More broadly, I think any extension does not violate the core should be acceptable. Community experts know the best of their data. Wenli ----- Original Message ----- From: John Caron <caron@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Wednesday, October 1, 2008 11:43 pm Subject: Re: [galeon] WCS CF-netCDF profile document
Hi Wenli:Thanks very much for your summary. Two questions: 1) does the core define any GetCoverage response? GML? GeoTIFF? 2) What limits are placed on what a community like Galeon can do when we define "our" extension?Regards, John
galeon archives: