[mapguide-internals] RFC60 for vote please

Mon May 11 09:14:28 EDT 2009

Hi Zac,

Looking at this email trail again: I only need commitment that the RFC will be updated so that it will say that it also supports the enhanced symbolization (as Walt states below).

Typically, these types of comments and updates are done after the formal review process before putting an RFC to vote, but the PSC decided to take a risk and allow this RFC to go directly to vote without the formal review because we mistakenly thought there would not be any problems.

Thanks
Tom

________________________________________
From: mapguide-internals-bounces at lists.osgeo.org [mapguide-internals-bounces at lists.osgeo.org] On Behalf Of Zac Spitzer [zac.spitzer at gmail.com]
Sent: Sunday, May 10, 2009 10:13 PM
To: MapGuide Internals Mail List
Subject: Re: [mapguide-internals] RFC60 for vote please

UV posted a new patch addressing the comments a few days ago

http://trac.osgeo.org/mapguide/attachment/wiki/MapGuideRfc60/MgDevPatch-RFC60-v8.patch

z

On Mon, May 11, 2009 at 1:36 PM, Tom Fukushima
<tom.fukushima at autodesk.com> wrote:
> I would like to wait for a resolution to this before I vote on RFC 60.  So please extend our normal 48 hour voting period for this RFC; or cancel the vote.
>
> Thanks
> Tom
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: mapguide-internals-bounces at lists.osgeo.org [mailto:mapguide-internals-bounces at lists.osgeo.org] On Behalf Of UV
> Sent: Friday, May 08, 2009 1:56 AM
> To: MapGuide Internals Mail List
> Subject: Re: [mapguide-internals] RFC60 for vote please
>
> I would be happy to support the new stylization but its too much effort
> on my level of understanding of the maps
> to create useful testcases and maps from scratch to permit to develop my
> code.
> I believe thats more work for me than to do the coding.....
>
> So lets wait until this is a defect which means there is a test case!!
>
> Walt Welton-Lair wrote:
>> Ok, I misunderstood.  There's already some color palette support now, but it doesn't work well (for both old and new stylization), so the defect is already there.  RFC 60 only improves the support for the old stylization.
>>
>> That's good - one of my concerns is now gone.  But the rest of my comments still apply.
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: mapguide-internals-bounces at lists.osgeo.org [mailto:mapguide-internals-bounces at lists.osgeo.org] On Behalf Of Walt Welton-Lair
>> Sent: Thursday, May 07, 2009 11:28 PM
>> To: MapGuide Internals Mail List
>> Subject: RE: [mapguide-internals] RFC60 for vote please
>>
>> ?????  There's no color palette support in the code right now, so there's no defect.  RFC 60 plans to submit a partial implementation.  That will introduce a defect - a TODO item.
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: mapguide-internals-bounces at lists.osgeo.org [mailto:mapguide-internals-bounces at lists.osgeo.org] On Behalf Of Zac Spitzer
>> Sent: Thursday, May 07, 2009 11:24 PM
>> To: MapGuide Internals Mail List
>> Subject: Re: [mapguide-internals] RFC60 for vote please
>>
>> moot point but the "new defect" is a actually a pre existing defect?
>>
>> On Fri, May 8, 2009 at 1:20 PM, Walt Welton-Lair
>> <walt.welton-lair at autodesk.com> wrote:
>>
>>> I think the patch is ok, and we should probably move forward with it.
>>>
>>> However, I still have a gripe with RFC60 in that it leaves out the new enhanced stylization work (Composite Symbolizations).  The RFC says:
>>>
>>>    In this phase only the colors from the VectorLayerDefinitions and in there the Area, Line, and Point Symbolizations
>>>    are parsed as cleartext. Any further evaluation requires resource lookups which are a higher order of complexity and
>>>    should not be permanently enabled.
>>>    ...
>>>    Like the resource lookup this can be added at a later point in time...
>>>
>>> What exactly do you mean by "should not be permanently enabled"?  In what "phase" will the remaining work be done?  Who's going to do this?
>>>
>>> Bottom line, as soon as you submit your patch you've created a new defect - PNG8 tiles created for layers that use the enhanced stylization will be incorrect.
>>>
>>> Another reason why it's important to not ignore composite symbolizations is that it influences your SW design.  As you know composite symbolizations support both inlined and referenced symbols (via resource IDs).  Your current design (adding a GetUsedColorList method to VectorScaleRange) works for inlined symbols but not for referenced symbols.  The MdfModel does not know about resources / resource service (nor should it), so it won't be possible to look up the referenced symbols and obtain their colors with your current design.  The GetUsedColorList implementation needs to be moved somewhere else to correctly support composite symbolizations.  (I originally explained all this in an email back on March 24th.)
>>>
>>>
>>> Anyway, let's not keep this from moving forward with RFC60.  But I would like some answers to my questions.
>>>
>>> Walt
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: mapguide-internals-bounces at lists.osgeo.org [mailto:mapguide-internals-bounces at lists.osgeo.org] On Behalf Of UV
>>> Sent: Thursday, May 07, 2009 12:05 AM
>>> To: MapGuide Internals Mail List
>>> Subject: [mapguide-internals] RFC60 for vote please
>>>
>>> Please have a look at the patch submitted for RFC60.
>>>
>>> This is straightforward code so lets please commit it finally.
>>> * Collection of color strings in VectorScale.
>>> * Pruning the list in the renderer service. (this is were those strings
>>> can be parsed differently)
>>> * Using the list in AGGImageIo.
>>> The rest is comments and boilerplate code passing on parameters.
>>> Any additional functionality can be easily added later.
>>>
>>> I spent months now evaluating this patch as I had to be sure that the
>>> problems were not from my code.
>>> So I am sure now that any problems I found are in any release build as
>>> of 2.1 where incomplete tiles can be generated.
>>> This, as we know now, has been called a feature and is caused by the
>>> exception handling in the stylization code
>>> which can be caused by resource limitations of the server.
>>> But this is not part of RFC60.
>>>
>>> So as there were no comments for quite some weeks this should be ready
>>> to go.
>>> Its difficult to work on different patches without a repository.
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> mapguide-internals mailing list
>>> mapguide-internals at lists.osgeo.org
>>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/mapguide-internals
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> mapguide-internals mailing list
>>> mapguide-internals at lists.osgeo.org
>>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/mapguide-internals
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> mapguide-internals mailing list
> mapguide-internals at lists.osgeo.org
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/mapguide-internals
> _______________________________________________
> mapguide-internals mailing list
> mapguide-internals at lists.osgeo.org
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/mapguide-internals
>

--
Zac Spitzer -
http://zacster.blogspot.com
+61 405 847 168
_______________________________________________
mapguide-internals mailing list
mapguide-internals at lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/mapguide-internals