[Mapbender-users] RE: recommendation for grouping layers
karsten at terragis.net
Sat Jan 12 05:59:06 EST 2008
That sounds great thanks.
One more question I have is that I wanted to use the java script variable to
"reverse" the order of display of the WMS in treeGDE. Thus, I added the
variable "reverse" with value = true, but it didn't seem to do anything. Is
that variable working or is there a trick to make it work?
I also tried treeConfGDE which works great. One thing I couldn't figure out
is whether there is a variable to include a css style sheet (like in treeGDE
the variable "cssfile") the doc doesn't seem to say anything about it...).
At the end I just hacked " mod_treefolderClient.php" and set my style there.
Is there a better way to do it?
Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2008 17:22:06 +0100
From: Melchior Moos <nimix at gmx.net>
Subject: Re: [Mapbender-users] RE: recommendation for grouping layers
To: Mapbender User List <mapbender_users at lists.osgeo.org>
Message-ID: <478797AE.50800 at gmx.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
The trunk version of TreeGDE2 can already handle grouped layers, so you
can try that (only for testing) or wait for Mapbender 2.5 which I think
will have the feature integrated. Unfotunately you can't copy the new
file to an old mapbender because it depends on changes to map.php.
karsten vennemann schrieb:
> Hi I tried to experiment with both options
> 1. using ConfTreeGde to group layers into folders
> 2. using TreegGde2 and multiple local wms to group layers into different
> (see also message below)
> I didn't come up with a conclusion yet what is better regarding
> ( I have 90 layers and a map file with 5000+ lines), but it seems that
> mapbender is using stacking multiple transparent images on top of each
> to assemble the map. Is that correct ?
> In that case this could have performance advantages if only switching off
> one group (WMS) during work with the maps and the other wms stay untouched
> mapserver has to render fewer layers this way when a user switches off
> However on the other hand initially loading multiple wms could slow down
> performance initially during the start of the session (compared to option
> 1)? Did anybody ever compare those or has thoughts on that ?
> Also in the documentation I read about treeGde2 at
> http://www.mapbender.org/index.php/TreeGDE2 : "Group information (nested
> layers) is already available in the database but is not used to display in
> Is there anybody that tried to accomplish nested layers (one level is
> for my purposes) in treeGde2?
> Or could anybody point out what would be involved adding that (I might
> it a shoot, even being new to mapbender). It sounds that the database
> already has some of the information needed to do that.
> From: karsten vennemann [mailto:karsten at terragis.net]
> Sent: Monday, January 07, 2008 18:05
> To: 'mapbender_users at lists.osgeo.org'
> Subject: recommendation for grouping layers
> in my project only local wms will be used and I wanted to ask your
> on the best way to do the group of the layers.
> The original map file's (on a MapServer only WebMap) layers are already
> grouped using the MapServer group tags.
> Now on the mapbender wiki I have read that I can use the custom tree to
> organize and group layers. Thus, I thought I could either produce one wms
> and one map file for each group - or I could stay with one map file and
> the custom tree to do the grouping.
> Would there be any advantages / disadvantages to either approach (having
> or multiple wms) ?
> Would I have to expect any differences in performance?
> How does that work anyway with multiple wms ?
> Does mapbender wait for responses from each wms and then assemble one
> image? or would it be multiple transparent images stacked on each other?
> This really would be interesting to know.
> Mapbender_users mailing list
> Mapbender_users at lists.osgeo.org
Mapbender_users mailing list
Mapbender_users at lists.osgeo.org
End of Mapbender_users Digest, Vol 14, Issue 10
More information about the Mapbender_users