This year's last version of WOML modules, "2011/11/15", was released today. When announcing the previous WOML version in August I wrote that I hoped that we'd seen the last major turn in the rocky road to the final WOML curve geometry definitions. Should have known that I was wrong again. Starting from the WOML 2011/11/15 only the GML geometry types are supported, including the verbose and cumbersome gml:Bezier. Personally I don't like it, but it seems that it makes living a lot easier with many software libraries and applications, when only GML geometry types are used. This way applications can separate the geometry properties from other properties by simply checking whether they contain one of the GML geometry elements (like gml:Curve).

I won't make any promises, but right now it looks like the WOML schemas might be somewhat stabilizing, which is good news. We are in progress of taking WOML-based forecasts into operational use at FMI, gradually replacing older XML-based weather products. Hopefully some of the WOML content will also be publicly available some time in future.

If you're using WOML, be it a simple hack or an operational system, please let us know, it would be nice to get some feedback on what we're doing.

Detailed release notes:

List of all the issues resolved in these releases:

Key Component/s P Summary Status

Please let us know if you have any issues with the new versions of the schemas, or would like additions or changes made in the following versions.

  • No labels


  1. Anonymous

    Hi Ilkka,

    I'm following a student that is approaching with a GeoServer App schema implementation of WOML to support either WMS service or WFS one. This work is going to carry on as a collaboration between University of Rome "La Sapienza" and GeoBeyond.

    If you would be interested of that don't hesitate to get in touch with me

    Best Regards,


    1. Unknown User (rinne) AUTHOR

      Hello Francesco,

      I'd love to hear your comments on WOML. I've personally only tried to implement WFS service with GeoServer App Schema (A.K.A. GML complex feature support) once, and I stumbled into a problem with supporting features from more than one namespace (need to return features consisting of feature types defined in both WOML Core and WOML SWO for example). However the situation might have changed since, so I'd very interested in hearing about your experiences with GeoServer App Schema WOML mapping.

      1. Anonymous

        Hello Ilkka,

        nice to hear you are interested. I will let you know as we encounter any issue, since we are interested in developing some parts, that could be an option to escape namespace's issue. I saw someone else asking for merging namespaces that probably means our approach could be a way to go. So keep us in contact.


  2. Anonymous

    Hello Ilkka,

    I have good news from our side. We finally got success to serve a few simple features with supporting the current App Schema WOML version. So definitively working with multiple namespaces and new GML 3.2.1. At the moment they comes from a file but we are in the middle to switching the datastore connection into a PostGIS database. I was wondering how usually the WOML-based forecasts workflow is approached since I'm not actually a meteorologist.