[GRASS-dev] New feature (algorithm and / or module) to implentto GRASS (long)

[Patton, Eric]

Wolf,

I agree 100% with Trevor; label placement is critical for my work, and
always had to be done in Arc to achieve the desired level of control. I
don't have any preference amongst the other three options, as I never
have need of this functionality in my work.

Whatever your decision, thanks for offering to improve Grass
functionality!

Cheers,

--
Eric Patton 
email: epatton at nrcan.gc.ca

> -----Original Message-----
> From: grass-dev-bounces at grass.itc.it 
> [mailto:grass-dev-bounces at grass.itc.it] On Behalf Of Trevor Wiens
> Sent: Thursday, March 01, 2007 7:35 PM
> To: Wolf Bergenheim
> Cc: GRASS developers list
> Subject: Re: [GRASS-dev] New feature (algorithm and / or 
> module) to implentto GRASS (long)

> Get marks and code for GRASS. What a wonderful idea. 
> 
> The options all sound interesting. My personal vote would be 
> for label placement as I see cartography as a major weakness 
> in GRASS and this would lay part of the foundation for better 
> cartography in GRASS. My experience in most systems is that 
> when it comes time for output hours can be wasted in label 
> placement so an algorithm to get one 90% good on that would 
> be a huge time saver for cartographic use. It would be very 
> useful, if it can be written such that it could be used by 
> either v.label, ps.map or perhaps a new interface in the 
> future. In that regard label size in relation to a paper or 
> view size will need to be taken into account.
> 
> My other choices in order of preference are 4, 3, and 2. In 
> regard to line smoothing I know little about it so I can't 
> state a preference on algorithm and thus it is my last 
> choice. I've not needed this functionality before so I've 
> never researched it.
> 
> Thanks
> 
> Trevor