Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Async and subsetting #274

Open
cmheazel opened this issue Jul 27, 2021 · 1 comment
Open

Async and subsetting #274

cmheazel opened this issue Jul 27, 2021 · 1 comment
Labels
Future Work Good idea cache - defer or allocate to another SWG Part 1 Applicable to Part 1 Core

Comments

@cmheazel
Copy link
Contributor

Simple Async and Subsetting have been proposed additions to common. They are needed by API-Coverages. Should we include them in the current releases and if so which one (Part 1 or 2)

@cmheazel cmheazel added Part 1 Applicable to Part 1 Core Collections Applicable to Collections (consider to use Part 2 instead) labels Jul 27, 2021
@jerstlouis
Copy link
Member

jerstlouis commented Jul 28, 2021

Async

The async & job management capabilities of OGC API - Processes, which already had the /jobs end-point moved out of /processes in anticipation of that, would be great, but should probably be its own Common part. This could then also be used with OGC API - Coverages. That defines both polling and callbacks (different approach than simple responeHandler?). It could also potentially lighten the OGC API - Processes specifications to refer to the Common building block in a future version. Async response could be controller with Prefer: header as done with processes (see also #231), i.e. async response if set to respond-async or if processing will take longer than specified wait: delay. Relevant Processes conformance classes:

Subsetting

@cmheazel cmheazel added the Future Work Good idea cache - defer or allocate to another SWG label Aug 4, 2021
@joanma747 joanma747 removed the Collections Applicable to Collections (consider to use Part 2 instead) label Mar 14, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Future Work Good idea cache - defer or allocate to another SWG Part 1 Applicable to Part 1 Core
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants