Google Earth WMS still undercooked

It’s been 4 months since my last rant on Google‘s half-baked support of WMS. To be honest i haven’t looked at recent BETA versions but I have v4.0.2722 and a little bit of time up my sleeve so lets have a look at my gripes from last time,

  1. The mandatory Service=WMS parameter is not attached to the online resource which causes some services to fail
  2. The is no support for layer subgroups as per WMS spec
  3. You cannot select the preferred image format when requesting (defaults to image/gif .. wheres my PNG!). Some services seem to pick PNG … ?
  4. The overlay never seems to be requested at the current, full extents .. for some reason?
  5. The [t] i’m assuming stands for transparency ?
  6. The client, out of courtesy, should always request any exceptions in image if the service supports it
  7. Generic HTTPS support is still broken for everything, including image overlays
  8. The client should really be able to interpret the bounding box and set the image overlays to start using the region KML functionality. If the average joe blogs adds a service, it would be for good measure to zoom to the envelope extents of that layer/service.

Hmmm, well 4 out of 8 seems to be have been fixed. Now for some new additions,

  1. The request string does not correctly append an empty STYLES= KVP when a single layer is added. The spec dictates this should always be requested, but GE for some reason only attaches this for multiple layers which causes exceptions with some strict services.
  2. The width and height always defaults to 512×512. Why? We aren’t using a tiled service here guys, GE should calculate the ratio from the screen window resolution and the set scale factor. Expecting Joe Blogs to know what value to set this to so their overlays dont look squished is absurd.
  3. While i crossed off the #3 issue because you can now edit the request string, the layer window should really include a dropdown of supported image formats that the user can choose from. Again, a usability thing.

Although some issues are resolved, the WMS support is still very average. With the latest interest of the OnEarth WMS service on the community forums, i would hope that some of these issues can be fixed with the next version. One day we will get there … meanwhile what_nick’s improved WorldWind WMS support gets my seal of approval~