| | 1 | = Hiding Layers in OGC Web Services = |
| | 2 | |
| | 3 | == Introduction == |
| | 4 | |
| | 5 | Everybody recognizes the need to be able to hide layers from a given mapfile from some or all OGC Web Service (OWS) requests. Some tickets about this are as old as 6 years old. Unfortunately we have been unable to come up with a solution because there are several angles to consider in approaching the problem. |
| | 6 | |
| | 7 | The goal of this page is to organize the resolution of this issue as follows: |
| | 8 | |
| | 9 | 1. Start by collecting use cases |
| | 10 | 2. Present and discuss possible solutions |
| | 11 | 3. Write approve a RFC |
| | 12 | 4. Implement the solution and enjoy! |
| | 13 | |
| | 14 | |
| | 15 | == References == |
| | 16 | |
| | 17 | Tickets: |
| | 18 | |
| | 19 | * ticket:337 : Need a way to prevent layers from being served via WMS |
| | 20 | * ticket:300 : Extend behavior of DUMP mapfile parameter for GML output |
| | 21 | * ticket:1952 : Tileindex Layer and WMS Get Capabilities |
| | 22 | * ticket:2582 : OWS GetCapabilities should skip layers with status == MS_DELETE |
| | 23 | |
| | 24 | Mailing list discussions: |
| | 25 | |
| | 26 | * This [http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/mapserver-users/2009-February/059944.html February 2009 mapserver-users thread] started with ticket:2582 and turned into a long exchange with some interesting use cases |
| | 27 | |
| | 28 | == Use Cases == |
| | 29 | |
| | 30 | 1. One needs the ability to hide tileindex layers to all OGC services |
| | 31 | |
| | 32 | 2. In a WMS mapfile where multiple scale-dependent layers are in a common group, we want only the group to appear in GetCapabilities and not the individual layers. However the layers should not be completely turned off since we want them to be visible in GetMap and queryable with GetFeatureInfo when the group is selected. This use case is common for WMS and may (or may not) apply to other OGC services. |
| | 33 | |
| | 34 | 3. One may want to offer a given layer via WMS but not via WFS (or any combination of services). In other words, we need the ability to select in which OGC services a given layer is exposed. |
| | 35 | |
| | 36 | 4. ... |
| | 37 | |
| | 38 | 5. ... |
| | 39 | |
| | 40 | == Proposed Solutions == |
| | 41 | |
| | 42 | === Solution 1 === |
| | 43 | |
| | 44 | ... |
| | 45 | |
| | 46 | === Solution 2 === |
| | 47 | |
| | 48 | ... |
| | 49 | |
| | 50 | == Conclusion / Final Solution == |
| | 51 | |
| | 52 | The final solution will be the object of a RFC... link to this RFC here when we get there. |
