COLORITEM & kin

[Daniel Morissette]

Attila Csipa wrote:
>> http://mapserver.gis.umn.edu/development/rfc/ms-rfc-19
> 
> The COLOR is not mentioned explicitly but it seems to be one rare ones not 
> fitting the usual binding scenarion as it is almost the only one that has 
> multiple parameters. Can there be multiple bindings ? Now you have:
> 
> COLOR [r] [g] [b]
> 
> if you translate this into the logic of RFC19 does this mean it would have 
> three separate bindings for the colour components (items r, g and b), or 
> would it still be a single binding that encompasses all three values (like a 
> 0xRRGGBB(AA) number) ? This especially gets tricky if we are operating with 
> PC256 images, should we as Frank asked even use values, or would some sort of 
> mapping be more appropriate ?


You're correct that RFC-19 is not clear on which parameters will be 
mapped. I think this should be corrected in the RFC and it should 
explicitly list all parameters that are mappable and how they operate.

I had the same question and asked not long ago on this list about 
mapping of colors and Steve confirmed that this would be supported as 
well. However I had assumed that COLOR would map to a single field and 
not to 3 fields. Since there are multiple possible ways to do the 
mapping that's one more reason to update the RFC to better specify how 
colors will be mapped.

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