[gdal-dev] Proposed updates to the GDAL feature style spec

Alan Thomas athomas at thinkspatial.com.au
Tue Jan 2 21:52:55 PST 2018


Thanks for the feedback, Even. If there is no other feedback in the
next few days I will merge the change, as well as an extra code fix to
implement change 8.

On 2 January 2018 at 21:47, Even Rouault <even.rouault at spatialys.com> wrote:
>> 5. [...] change the definition of
>> ogr-brush-1 to mean a solid fill in the selected background color;
>> change the suggested default for BRUSH bc to transparent
>> (#FFFFFF00).
>
> I'd suggest that we add a rule so as to keep the current semantics: if
> ogr-brush-1 is used, then bc must be omitted (or set to a color with
> alpha=0). It would be confusing to have the possibility to have 2 ways to
> express a solid fill with either ogr-brush-0 + fc or ogr-brush-1 + bc. So
> people wanting a solid fill should use ogr-brush-0 (or don't specify it)
>

I expected that this might be a problematic change. I'm happy to leave
ogr-brush-1 alone. If existing code is already special-casing
ogr-brush-1, then keeping the spec the way it is would be less
confusing.

Therefore line 492 will say "null brush (transparent - no fill,
irrespective of fc or bc values)".

Alan

-- 
Alan Thomas
Software Developer
ThinkSpatial
http://www.thinkspatial.com.au


More information about the gdal-dev mailing list