[Bug 1688] Auto Angle - Incorrectly rotated Labels

[Mark Leslie]

I've managed to add a backward compatibility issue via typo that I'll
head off now.
ANGLE AUTO would be the default and current algorithm.
ANGLE AUTO2 would be the new version.


Mark Leslie wrote:
> That sounds like a good plan.
> 
> So the overview of the problem is that we have an a dataset that
> contains short linestrings, each with a single character that we want
> displayed.  This was done to work around some limitations in ArcMap, and
> the client wants Mapserver to produce a similar image.  Looking at the
> desired image as shown by ArcMap
> <http://mapserver.gis.umn.edu/bugs/attachment.cgi?id=466&action=view> vs
> MapServer
> <http://mapserver.gis.umn.edu/bugs/attachment.cgi?id=467&action=view>,
> you can see that some of the characters are inverted.  As I oversimplify
> it, Mapserver attempts to render text upright with respect to the map,
> while in this case, we want the text rendered from left to right along
> the linestring.  There is a simple two-line 'fix' for this, but it
> changes the expected behaviour of the label rendering.  The real
> solution that came from the discussion in the bug tracker, would be to
> add a keyword to ANGLE to state which algorithm to use.  It would look
> like ANGLE AUTOTRUE for the default, and current, algorithm, or ANGLE
> AUTO2 for the new algorithm.
> I'm not completely sure of the extent of this change, as I haven't
> implemented it yet.  Many of you would know better than I.  I don't
> expect to touch much of the code, and there should be no backwards
> compatibility issues, but I tend to view anything that touches the lexer
> as a significant change.
> Any thoughts or concerns?
> Mark Leslie
> 
> Stephen Woodbridge wrote:
>> Hi Mark,
>>
>> You might want to just start with an email to the dev list with a brief
>> description of the problem (yeah it is described in the bug) and how you
>> plan to solve it and any particular testing issues. That will give the
>> dev team a better idea of the size and scope and they can suggest email,
>> bugtracker, and/or rfc from that.
>>
>> -Steve W
>>
>> bugzilla-daemon at lists.gis.umn.edu wrote:
>>> http://mapserver.gis.umn.edu/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=1688
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ------- Additional Comments From mark at refractions.net  2006-10-19
>>> 12:20 -------
>>> Well, it looks like I'm taking up this 'bug' and trying to get it
>>> resolved.  My
>>> first question is, is this large enough to warrent an RFC?  Looking
>>> throught
>>> RFC1, it doesn't seem to fit the need, but since there is a change to the
>>> mapfile, if feels to me that there should be greater visibility than
>>> in this
>>> bugtracker.  Any thoughts?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
>>> You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.