[GRASS-dev] Re: [GRASS GIS] #106: wxgrass: zoom to computational region does not respect resolution set with g.region

Michael Barton michael.barton at asu.edu
Fri Mar 28 18:15:28 EDT 2008

On Mar 28, 2008, at 5:32 AM, Moritz Lennert wrote:
> On 28/03/08 07:10, Michael Barton wrote:
>>>  I think it would be useful to have the same system as in gis.m,  
>>> i.e. with
>>>  one display mode aligning to window size and another mode  
>>> showing the
>>>  exact computation region, i.e. respecting extent and resolution.
>> I think that these two different modes are fairly confusing to  
>> most users.
>> Martin has implemented something that I think is much more useful  
>> and easier to understand, and that serves the same purpose. As  
>> mentioned above, the display always fills the window and has a  
>> constant resolution. However, the computational region is shown by  
>> a red box outline. This means you can always tell the region in  
>> which map modification operations will take place, without having  
>> a very strange-looking map in the display window, with a lot of  
>> white space around it.
> But that brings us back to my original response ("The issue is not  
> only the extent, but also the resolution."). Yes, the red box is  
> very useful (although the functionality is maybe a hidden - maybe  
> the "show" text box should always be visible and read "show extent  
> of computational region", but a visual information about the  
> resolution is also very important. It has happened to me often  
> enought that I launch a command which then takes much longer than  
> expected, only to find out that the computational region's  
> resolution was much higher than the display's. Having a mode which  
> allows seeing the exact computational region settings is, thus,  
> very helpful...No need to make it the default, and you could  
> possibly hide it a bit to not confuse users, but IMHO, it should be  
> an option for power users.
> Moritz


I agree that it would be quite helpful for just the reason you  
describe to have the computational resolution shown, if it's not (it  
may be an option, but I don't remember at the moment). This is a good  
idea to add that to the display option.

But there is no point in making the display itself have the same  
resolution (xy pixels) as the map.


More information about the grass-dev mailing list