[Mapserver-dev] Re: time support

David W. Graham dgraham at i3.com
Thu Jan 15 12:40:27 EST 2004


Your solution actually makes a lot of sense.  Often times I have the
"TILEINDEX" shapefile in the MAP object as a layer unto itself called the
"coverage" of the raster data.  This allows user to turn on a layer and see
the tile lines and names of the tiles (used in data management and ordering
apps).  But the problem still remains that nature of the query on the
TILELAYER in order to find the locations for the actual image tiles.

Any suggestions?


David W. Graham 

Director of Application Development
dgraham at i3.com 
Voice: +1-970-482-4400
Fax: +1-970-482-4499
Web: www.i3.com 

201 Linden, Third Floor    	
Fort Collins, CO 80524    	

-----Original Message-----
From: mapserver-dev-admin at lists.gis.umn.edu
[mailto:mapserver-dev-admin at lists.gis.umn.edu] On Behalf Of Brent Fraser
Sent: Wednesday, January 14, 2004 11:44 AM
To: Steve Lime
Cc: mapserver-dev at lists.gis.umn.edu
Subject: Re: [Mapserver-dev] Re: time support


  Here's an idea from left field.  The basic problem is we're on the road to
creating a layer-within-a-layer, adding new keywords and possibly changing
the syntax of existing keywords.

How about pointing to another layer (a tileindex layer) from the layer of

  NAME 'landsat images'
  TYPE raster
  TILEITEM "Location"
  TILELAYER "landsat_tiles"  # new keyword; points to tile layer END

  NAME 'landsat tile outlines'
  TYPE polygon                     # or have a new type of  "tile" ?
  STATUS off
  DATA "index/landsat.shp"

That way we could leverage existing filtering, connection, etc structure for
the tile layer.  Might be too weird though....


----- Original Message -----
From: "Steve Lime" <steve.lime at dnr.state.mn.us>
To: <morissette at dmsolutions.ca>
Cc: <mapserver-dev at lists.gis.umn.edu>
Sent: Wednesday, January 14, 2004 10:16 AM
Subject: Re: [Mapserver-dev] Re: time support

> I could create a single new keyword (e.g. TILES) and use the older 
> keywords to populate members of the new object. That's how styles work 
> so that older map files don't break. In effect:
> would be the same as
>   DATA 'foo'
> To take advantage of filtering you'd have to move to the TILES object.
> The only
> side effect would be that mapscript would break since 
> $layer->{tileindex} isn't real anymore. That was the same case with 
> styles.
> This seems a reasonable compromise to me anyway.
> Steve
> >>> Daniel Morissette <morissette at dmsolutions.ca> 1/14/2004 7:55:30 AM
> >>>
> Steve Lime wrote:
> > Any comments out there? I kinda need to move swiftly...
> >
> >
> I am concerned by the fact that the new tileindex object would break 
> existing mapfiles.  Could we stick to shapefile tileindexes for this 
> release for now, since we don't have much time anyway, and perhaps in 
> a
> later release we could move a tileindex object and support tile 
> indexes
> in any format?
> I suppose the main drawback of this approach would be that we would 
> have to create TILEFILTER/TILEFILTERITEM which would have to be 
> deprecated later when we create the tileindex object.
> I dunno.... I think we should try to avoid breaking older mapfiles 
> unless we really have to... that's always a pain for users to upgrade 
> when we break the mapfile format.
> Daniel
> --
> ------------------------------------------------------------
>   Daniel Morissette               morissette at dmsolutions.ca
>   DM Solutions Group              http://www.dmsolutions.ca/
> ------------------------------------------------------------
> _______________________________________________
> Mapserver-dev mailing list
> Mapserver-dev at lists.gis.umn.edu
> http://lists.gis.umn.edu/mailman/listinfo/mapserver-dev

Mapserver-dev mailing list
Mapserver-dev at lists.gis.umn.edu

More information about the mapserver-dev mailing list