RFC 14 out for comment...

[Steve Lime]

Sean: Good point. I thought about that too and  would agree except 
that for the types of things folks want to do it might be more convenient 
to define this at the feature level. I think it will be quite common to place 
text in multiple corners of an output image. Granted, that could be handled 
with multiple layer definitions. I do like the ORIGIN parameter regardless, 
sounds better than RELATIVETO...

What do folks think about having to define multiple layers to define
multiple origins?

Steve

>>> Sean Gillies <sgillies at FRII.COM> 4/10/2006 10:29:59 PM >>>
On Apr 10, 2006, at 3:31 PM, Steve Lime wrote:

> Hi all: I posted a new RFC for supporting relative coordinates  
> (primarily =
> for inline features)
> to the mapserver website. Comments would be appreciated. The actual =
> computations
> are trivial to make this work. The issues are more implementation  
> related- =
> hanging a
> new parameter off a shapeObj vs something else and so on...
>
> I have coded up one solution and the end result is very useful.
>
> Steve

Steve,

To me, "relative to XX" is just a shorthand description of a  
coordinate reference systems. When I think of it as a CRS, it clearly  
should be defined at the layer level like the geographic and  
projected coordinate systems already in play.

     layer.setImageOrigin(LR)   # or maybe even override setProjection()
     layer.transform = MS_FALSE
     layer.addFeature(shape)
     layer.draw()

My $0.02
Sean

---
Sean Gillies
http://zcologia.com