Feature request #7719
add GML response to GetFeatureInfo in qgis mapserver
|Pull Request or Patch supplied:||Yes||Resolution:||fixed|
|Easy fix?:||No||Copied to github as #:||16628|
this would allow, among the other things, to use the new feature of the QGIS wms client that allows to copy/paste features from WMS servers.
Note: on (UMN) mapserver this is possible when at a layer level is added the "gml_geometries" parameter
Description: (Optional, applies only to GetFeatureInfo GML requests) Provides a name for geometry elements. The value is specified as a string to be used for geometry element names. By default, GML geometries are not written in GML GetFeatureInfo output, unless gml_geometries and gml_[geometry name]_type are both set. By default, only the bounding box is written. If gml_geometries is set to “none”, neither the bounding box nor the geometry are written.
#1 Updated by Stéphane Brunner almost 6 years ago
We also needs this feature than I start to work on it, but I see some design issue to implement it:
The method QgsWMSServer::getFeatureInfo fill a QDomDocument but I think that it should fill a QMap<QString, QList<QgsFeature>> or a QList<QgsFeature>, the first one has the advantage to separate the features per layer (QString => layer name).
The method QgsWMSServer::convertFeatureInfoToSIA2045 should be moved to QgsHttpRequestHandler.
Ad the methods QgsWFSServer::createFeatureGML2 and QgsWFSServer::createFeatureGML3 should probably be shared between WMS/WFS server but I don't know where to put them.
It never develop in the QGis core before than all input are welcome.
Stéphane Brunner / Camptocamp
#3 Updated by Giovanni Manghi almost 6 years ago
Stéphane Brunner wrote:
I just see that QgsHttpRequestHandler hasn't any dependencies on QGis components than I think that's almost content of the method QgsHttpRequestHandler::sendGetFeatureInfoResponse that should moved to QgsWMSServer::getFeatureInfo ...
better move this discussion in the developers mailing list.
#4 Updated by René-Luc ReLuc almost 6 years ago
- Assignee set to Marco Hugentobler
- Target version changed from Future Release - Nice to have to Future Release - High Priority
- Pull Request or Patch supplied changed from No to Yes
- % Done changed from 0 to 100
Can be closed ?