Vote on RFC 26

[Steve Lime]

Let me update the RFC tonite with the debug idea Dan mentioned and PATTERN. 

Steve

>>> On 7/12/2007 at 9:29 AM, in message <46963AE2.9050707 at swoodbridge.com>, Stephen
Woodbridge <woodbri at SWOODBRIDGE.COM> wrote:
> +1
> 
> I'm good either way on the queryable thing, but lets get other changes 
> done and committed. That would include the PATTERN vs STYLE in the SYMBOLs.
> 
> -Steve W
> 
> Daniel Morissette wrote:
>> +1 on RFC-26 with the caveat that the old keywords should either produce 
>> a fatal parsing error or a msDebug() warning (level 1) to encourage 
>> users to upgrade. This was discussed in the thread and supported by at 
>> least myself and SteveW but never made it in the RFC. Something like:
>> 
>> "Keyword TRANSPARENCY has been renamed OPACITY in MapServer 5.0. Please 
>> update your mapfile."
>> 
>> About the queryable thing, let's forget about that for now and 
>> concentrate on the scale and opacity issues.
>> 
>> Daniel
>> 
>> 
>> Steve Lime wrote:
>>> Anyone care to vote at all on this? I need one more +1 and would love 
>>> to get it off my plate. Of course, if folks would rather not touch the 
>>> various scale parameters then fine, less work.
>>>
>>> Steve
>>>
>>>>>> Steve Lime <Steve.Lime at DNR.STATE.MN.US> 07/09/07 12:15 PM >>>
>>> Hi all: I noticed that RFC 26 was never voted on. Looks like there was 
>>> discussion about broadening changes
>>> as opposed to those proposed (note the TRANSPARENCY => OPACITY switch 
>>> has already been) made.
>>>
>>> Dealing with making layers queryable seemed to be the last issue and 
>>> there was no resolution as of 5/8 when
>>> that thread died.
>>>
>>> Steve
>>>
>>> BTW One last change I'd like to see is removing the STYLE keyword in 
>>> symbol files in favor of PATTERN...
>> 
>>