Vote on RFC 31?

[Daniel Morissette]

Steve Lime wrote:
> 
> So, URL variable names will still require a bit of intelligence to know what object to
> update. They would take the identical form as they do now, e.g. map_scalebar
> or map_layername. Admittedly URL config is really only useful for modifying the 
> highest level objects (e.g. scalebar, layer, legend and so on). Getting at the nested
> objects of a layer or a class is rather difficult. Right now the variable naming supports
> numeric access since there is no other way to uniquely reference a class or style. To
>  get to the 1st style in the 1st class of layer 'foo' you do:
> 
>   map_foo_class_0_style_0 or map_layer_5_class_0_style_0
> 
> We have to retain that unfortunately. I can't think of a better method, but it does
> work. Actually I'd prefer slightly more intuitive syntax like:
> 
> map_layer=foo_class=0_style=2
> 

Or perhaps array-type syntax such as:

map_layer[foo]_class[0]_style[2]=COLOR+255+0+0

I believe it should be possible to access classes by name as well if the 
target class has its name set, right?

Daniel
-- 
Daniel Morissette
http://www.mapgears.com/