[Geowanking] a modest proposal for google maps
Phillip C. Dibner
pcd at ecosystem.com
Mon Jul 25 15:42:10 PDT 2005
I'm really glad you said this. It's the message I'm trying to
demonstrate for the bioinformatics community. But - it was really
just my own impression. The only other people I've heard say that GML
is easy are the folks from Galdos. Mind you, I'm still knocking my
head against it, and there are some things that are quite clumsy to do,
but the schemata here are very simple, and with just a bit of (self-)
education, the implementations do not seem difficult.
Unfortunately, I really don't know geoserver. Time to get started, I
On Jul 21, 2005, at 10:47 AM, James Macgill wrote:
>> How do we share *simple* map information, like the kind that the
>> google maps
>> API supports, basically markers, marker data (content), and line
>> GML? Too complicated at first blush.
> Everything else... not complicated enough at second or third blush...
> (oh, your not using the same CRS as me?, hay points are nice, what
> about lines... now polygons... now lets put some attributes in with
> this... and styling, and ...)
> GML too comlex? yes it is in its full scope, 2.1.2 is just about
> managable and GML 3.0 in full is too complex for almost everybody.
> But and its a big BUT, if you have a specific application in mind, and
> you spend a little time comming up with a schema for your problem that
> is NOT complex (i.e. without lots of substituon groups and nested
> feature membership and cubic spline curves) then GML can be very easy.
> Add to that the ability to push data in and out of a transactional
> WFS (like geoserver) and you are up and running with a lot of power
> and flexibility. You can filter the data, do spatial queries (dwithin
> with a limit is VERY handy for gmaps markers if you want the ones near
> the center of the map but without getting more than a hundred or so
> Geowanking mailing list
> Geowanking at lists.burri.to
Phillip C. Dibner
(650) 948-7895 Fax
More information about the Geowanking