[mapguide-internals] Motion: Vote on RFC 108 - Support Watermark

[Jason Birch]

I should have commented earlier. I'm not happy with the tight linking
between Layer and Map that the explicit watermark placement scheme
introduces. It implies that the layer author and the map author are
the same person and/or that the map author can control where layers
put their watermarks. This reduces the layer author's ability to code
generic layers for inclusion in maps across the enterprise and makes
layer-specific watermarks far less valuable in non-WMS scenarios.  I
would have liked to see a watermark placement notation and resolver
similar to label placement.

Anyway, I like the proposal for use on WMS Layers and for Maps.

+0 Jason

On 2010-08-17, Tom Fukushima <tom.fukushima at autodesk.com> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
>
>
>
>
> Looks like the discussion of RFC 106 has finished and all comments have been
> addressed. So let's vote on
>
>
>
> RFC 108 - Support Watermark
>
> http://trac.osgeo.org/mapguide/wiki/MapGuideRfc108
>
>
>
> +1 Tom
>
>
>
> Thanks
>
> Tom
>
> _______________________________________________
> mapguide-internals mailing list
> mapguide-internals at lists.osgeo.org
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/mapguide-internals
>