Earlier this week James Fee, celebrity GIS blogger (seriously, how many other GIS bloggers can you name), posted a blog about the death of the WMS. He was commenting on a blog from Sophia Parafina, who was discussing the difficulties of working with the WMS URL. Surprisingly enough, this isn’t the first time someone has shared their “love” of the WMS standard.
If you have programmed using a WMS you probably have become frustrated when trying to understand what each component of the URL means, the differences between the different versions, and how different GIS server software handles the WMS. I don’t think the WMS is dead, but its use may need to be reevaluated. For example, the WMS servers that I take advantage of tend to have few datasets (less than 30) served from them, and I only use raster datasets, such as historical maps, or aerial photography, in my applications. I try to avoid large WMS servers with 100s of layers, and I rarely use vector from them, because I don’t like wait times with large WMS servers, and vector data renders poorly.
Here are a few Google Maps V3 API examples running WMS data:
ArcGIS Server WMS in Google Maps
Open Layers WMS in Google Maps
Microsoft Research Maps in Google Maps
Multiple WMS Service in a Single Site
Large Aerial Photography Datasets
That’s all for today! Hooray weekend!
p.s., For my next post I’ll try to have a couple of pictures. People hate reading.
4 Replies to “In Defense of the WMS”
Have you ever tryed to make a mash-up with WMS layer from MapServer? I will try to adjust your code.
What about GetFeatureInfo? Have you seen any example of this on google maps API v 3
Comments are closed.