Changes between Version 58 and Version 59 of Bolsena2010


Ignore:
Timestamp:
May 18, 2010, 3:30:40 PM (14 years ago)
Author:
mcoudert
Comment:

--

Legend:

Unmodified
Added
Removed
Modified

  • Bolsena2010

    v58 v59  
    5454 || 32 || ||Data management ||!GeoNetwork assumes resources that are tagged as data for download in gmd:protocol are local. Action: GeoNetwork needs to allow for the fact that data tagged as data for download may not be local. || ||
    5555 || 33 || ||Remote search||Remote search across a number of sites returns a pre-selected number of hits from all remote sites (pre-selected number is a search option) – it should return these hits from each site. Action: Presentation of pre-selected number of hits from each remote site – may require more delving into JZKit. || ||
    56  || 34 || || || || ||
    57  || 35 || || || || ||
    58  || 36 || || || || ||
    59  || 37 || || || || ||
    60  || 38 || || || || ||
    61  || 39 || || || || ||
    62  || 40 || || || || ||
     56 || 34 || ||Remote search||Presentation of returned hits from remote sites may be very slow because search is limited by the speed of the slowest site. Action: Presentations of first returned hits from first responding remote site should not have to wait on the slowest site – may require more delving into JZKit. || ||
     57 || 35 || ||Configuration||There are too many configuration files in too many places eg. repositories.xml.tem and not all configuration options are supported by the existing admin interfaces. Action: Continue to consolidate configuration options in the system configuration interface. || ||
     58 || 36 || ||Web map client|| There is no documentation for the implementation of alternative web map clients to Intermap and this makes it appear that the process is far harder than it actually is. Given the enthusiasm for an OpenLayers-based interface, what "interface" there currently is will probably soon be rapidly-evolving - if not replaced completely. Action: Document the interface that GeoNetwork uses to call a web map client so that sites can substitute their own.|| ||
     59 || 37 || ||Distributed search||Current capability of !GeoNetwork to use distributed searching is given a low priority and not being developed when compared with the local search. Action: More consideration is required towards distributed searches and proper attention should be given to it.|| ||
     60 || 38 || ||Distributed CSW search|| Distributed CSW searches are not available. Action: All OGC CSW standards and specifications should be implemented. || ||
     61 || 39 || || XML validation|| Potential for remotely accessed information to be malicious. Action: !GeoNetwork should validate all XML inputs and responses (eg. as it does for CSW) and check expected MIME types e.g. you ask for a GIF, you get a GIF. And indicate / reject non-conforming content with a warning?|| ||
     62 || 40 || ||Perfs enhancement (XSL)|| !GeoNetwork does too much expensive processing of XML documents with XSLT. Action: Continue to seek out and remove unnecessary XSLT processing.|| ||
    6363 || 41 || || || || ||
    6464
    … …  
    7272 * From 16 to XX : Topics extracted from Australia/New Zealand Community GeoNetwork Feedback
    7373
    74 
    75 
    76  *
    77 
    78  * Presentation of returned hits from remote sites may be very slow because search is limited by the speed of the slowest site. Action: Presentations of first returned hits from first responding remote site should not have to wait on the slowest site – may require more delving into JZKit.
    79 
    80  * There are too many configuration files in too many places eg. repositories.xml.tem and not all configuration options are supported by the existing admin interfaces. Action: Continue to consolidate configuration options in the system configuration interface.
    81 
    82  * There is no documentation for the implementation of alternative web map clients to Intermap and this makes it appear that the process is far harder than it actually is. Given the enthusiasm for an OpenLayers-based interface, what "interface" there currently is will probably soon be rapidly-evolving - if not replaced completely. Action: Document the interface that GeoNetwork uses to call a web map client so that sites can substitute their own.
    83 
    84  * Current capability of !GeoNetwork to use distributed searching is given a low priority and not being developed when compared with the local search. Action: More consideration is required towards distributed searches and proper attention should be given to it.
    85 
    86  * Distributed CSW searches are not available. Action: All OGC CSW standards and specifications should be implemented.
    87 
    88  * Potential for remotely accessed information to be malicious. Action: !GeoNetwork should validate all XML inputs and responses (eg. as it does for CSW) and check expected MIME types e.g. you ask for a GIF, you get a GIF. And indicate / reject non-conforming content with a warning?
    89 
    90  * !GeoNetwork does too much expensive processing of XML documents with XSLT. Action: Continue to seek out and remove unnecessary XSLT processing.
    9174
    9275 * The way that !GeoNetwork handles timeouts to remote requests is not configurable. Action: In GeoNetwork, timeout on remote requests e.g. WMS, should be configurable via the administration interface.