No, that's not the problem... the problem is that wcs 1.0.0 and 1.1.0 
now parse the keywords differently.  1.0.0 creates a list of keywords 
(which is the logical structure to use, I believe).  1.1.0 overrides the 
default behavior, which is to create a dictionary, and replicates the 
behavior in 1.0.0.

I can't speak to the performance side of things, but logically, I think 
we want to be storing the keywords in a list as a dictionary is used for 
associating them with something, and in this context, the keywords stand 
alone and have no association.

(Ok, I will speak to performance.  This post:

http://stackoverflow.com/questions/8423493/what-is-the-performance-of-objects-arrays-in-javascript-specifically-for-googl 


suggests that for Chrome at least, adding elements to an array is 
significantly faster than doing the same with an object.

This post:

http://news.qooxdoo.org/javascript-array-performance-oddities-characteristics

makes a similar suggestion, for all browsers, but reports a smaller 
difference.)



On 2013-09-27 13:52, Bart van den Eijnden wrote:
>
> In lib/OpenLayers/Format/WCSCapabilities/v1_1_0.js:
>
> > @@ -101,7 +101,19 @@ OpenLayers.Format.WCSCapabilities.v1_1_0 = OpenLayers.Class(
> >                  }
> >              }
> >          }, OpenLayers.Format.WCSCapabilities.v1.prototype.readers["wcs"]),
> > -        "ows": OpenLayers.Format.OWSCommon.v1_1_0.prototype.readers["ows"]
> > +        "ows": OpenLayers.Util.applyDefaults({
> > +            // ows puts keywords in a dictionary, which doesn't make a
> > +            // lot of sense in this context; we just want a list, so we'll
> > +            // override this aspect of the ows parsing.
> > +            "Keywords": function(node, serviceIdentification) {
>
> yeah the tests likely need to be adapted as well since they assume an 
> array?
>
> —
> Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub 
> <https://github.com/openlayers/openlayers/pull/846/files#r6625812>.
>