organize resources into "Groups"

[samperd]

User Story

As a user, owner,admin I want to create separate group to collect all of my web resources So I am not distracted by resources I am not concerned about.

Discussion

This feature would allow a single instance of GeoHealthCheck to server multiple stakeholders in a organized fashion within a large organization (such as a government with multiple departments). Adds some enterprise'ness' to it all

proposal

Provide a hierarchy such as

• Group (eg. an organization or a user)
  • Service Type (CSW, FTP)
    • Resource (individual web resources)

Access Control

• allow a user to "admin" a group by adding more group admins or users
• registered users can request to JOIN a group
• visibility of a group may be configurable for viability to everyone, logged in users, group user etc
• allow Groups within groups? eg
  • Government of Canada (parent group)
    • Environment Canada (sub group)
      • Service Type
        • Web Resource
    • Natural Resources Canada (sub group)
      • Service Type
        • Web Resource

[hannesaddec]

+1 to the proposal - I suggest to add a further subset for machines under a group. My use case would be to have a group NASA with 3 machines with 200 services each.

[archaeogeek]

+1 to the general idea of groups, though I'd start from a more simple idea, which is to allow grouping of resources for display purposes. This would require a method for defining groups, and then an additional dropdown box to choose the group when adding a new resource.

[justb4]

+1 for grouping. One use-case would be linking WWW:LINK Resources to a parent OGC:service endpoint/Resource. See comment in issue: https://github.com/geopython/GeoHealthCheck/issues/19#issuecomment-248765401

[justb4]

@samperd my suggestion is to implement grouping via tagging, at least for Resources. This would be simpler, also given the limited developer-resources we have at the moment and existing components for e.g. tag-clouds. See my comment in #75. The freedom with tagging is that organizations can define naming conventions/patterns via tags. I see grouping for Access Control as a different issue.