pramsey at cleverelephant.ca
Wed Oct 1 17:27:42 EDT 2008
Is there a reason that IGNORE_MISSING_DATA is a compile-time option? I
have a client request to make it a run-time option, and also add the
ability to run-time configure to error out in the case of WMS client
layers that fail.
I can RFC this, though it's relatively small... IGNORE_MISSING_DATA
would go away as a compile time option, the run-time behavior would
remain as the default (fail on missing) and there'd be a couple of
PROCESSING directives to fail (or not) on missing data and failed WMS
Thinking aloud, there's a number of ways data can be missing, in a
number of places
-- wms client layers
-- wfs client layers
-- missing data files
-- missing files referenced by tile indexes
-- bad database connections
-- failed SQL statements
Establishing and adding global policy would involve touching a great
deal of code. Hm. Unfortunately, I only have interest in the
tile-indexed-rasters and wms clients areas.
Anyone else have interests in this field of endeavor?
More information about the mapserver-dev