[mapguide-internals] RFC60 for vote please

Tom Fukushima tom.fukushima at autodesk.com
Mon May 11 12:18:54 EDT 2009


Why should I vote -1?  That seems a little extreme for such a small issue. UV has already indicated that he will fix any defects that show up with the enhanced stylization.  All I'm asking is that this item be documented in the RFC.  

The questions you have about the enhanced stylization and its implications also show that perhaps we should have put the RFC up for formal review.  I think that we are being very generous in trying to push this RFC forward.


-----Original Message-----
From: mapguide-internals-bounces at lists.osgeo.org [mailto:mapguide-internals-bounces at lists.osgeo.org] On Behalf Of Jason Birch
Sent: Monday, May 11, 2009 9:21 AM
To: MapGuide Internals Mail List
Subject: RE: [mapguide-internals] RFC60 for vote please


UV has indicated that he doesn't have the experience or examples of enhanced stylization required to implement this support.  If you're not happy with the RFC as it stands, I think you need to vote -1 and propose an alternative.

I'm not entirely clear on the implications of not implementing this support are.  I thought that it just meant that colours not in the list could still be represented in the palette, but in an automated (as previous) fashion, as long as there was room left in the palette.  I guess the risk would be that they wouldn't be represented at all in a map with too many colours statically defined, but that's a risk regardless?  Or am I missing something, and this will cause maps with enhanced stylization to not render those parts at all? 


-----Original Message-----
From: Tom Fukushima
Sent: Monday, May 11, 2009 6:14 AM
To: MapGuide Internals Mail List
Subject: RE: [mapguide-internals] RFC60 for vote please

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.
mapguide-internals mailing list
mapguide-internals at lists.osgeo.org

More information about the mapguide-internals mailing list