[mapserver-dev] Support for the MapInfo style zoom layering option.

[Daniel Morissette]

I'm not sure that I like moving minscaledenom and mascaledenom into a 
REQUIRES expression... the current approach with explicit keywords is 
simple and intuitive to use and understand for new users... embedding 
that into the REQUIRES expression will make a simple system more 
powerful, but also more complicated. I think in this specific case I'd 
be more in favor of new keywords to specify minmapwidth/maxmapwidth in 
parallel with minscaledemom/maxscaledenom and let the users pick the one 
they like.

Daniel


Tamas Szekeres wrote:
> 2008/6/25 Steve Lime <Steve.Lime at dnr.state.mn.us>:
>> If we went the way of using "REQUIRES" as a long term goal then I don't think it's worth adding parameters
>> with the intent of pulling them shortly. I think generalizing REQUIRES, with a custom parser as you mention
>> is the best solution. I think there is some leeway in syntax and we can talk about maintaining backwards
>> compatibility with respect to [layername].
>>
>> If your contract doesn't afford time to pursue the REQUIRES approach right now then perhaps a more
>> hackish, temporary solution would be to hijack minscaledenom and maxscaledenom and use a processing
>> directive to trigger the different interpretation.
>>
> 
> Steve,
> 
> I'm also in favour of this solution, and if it can be accepted by the
> user then I'll be trying to focus on msEvalContext and implement
> something inside, instead of adding new mapfile elements.
> I'll create another proposal with regards to my expected syntax in
> case if I have something working.
> 
> 
> Best regards,
> 
> Tamas
> _______________________________________________
> mapserver-dev mailing list
> mapserver-dev at lists.osgeo.org
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/mapserver-dev


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