[mapserver-dev] RE: 6.0 release plan - RFC45 - Consistent units in CLASS-> STYLE

Lime, Steve D (DNR) steve.lime at state.mn.us
Thu Mar 24 12:32:56 EDT 2011 

I suppose we should talk on mapserver-dev. ;-) I'm happy to nominate you for documentation
commit access. We like to try to match commits with tickets if non-trivial. There is a documentation
component in trac that Jeff owns that can be used for that.

One thing to note is that Jeff and Mike Smith started or at least pondered staring an "examples" 
effort in Montreal. I could see some of your symbolization examples being very useful in that context
too. 

I'll start with a +1 on granting Havard Tveite commit access for documentation.

Steve

-----Original Message-----
From: Havard Tveite [mailto:havard.tveite at umb.no] 
Sent: Thursday, March 24, 2011 11:25 AM
To: Lime, Steve D (DNR)
Cc: thomas.bonfort at gmail.com
Subject: Re: 6.0 release plan - RFC45 - Consistent units in CLASS-> STYLE

Dear Steve,

I would be happy to contribute on the documentation
related to rendering for version 6.  I will, of course,
have to consult you and Thomas in order to get
clarifications on what intended behaviour is in some
cases...

How do we proceed?  My osgeo user name is havatv.

I have no experience with committing (I have only
used SVN to check out).  Is there any documentation
that can help me avoid making big mistakes when
committing?
I have found a book, that I hope can help:
http://svnbook.red-bean.com/en/1.4/svn-book.pdf

Is it enough to issue the svn commit command with a
descriptive message using --message?

I have had a look at the documentation development
guide (http://mapserver.org/development/documentation.html),
which seems reasonably straight forward.
I have also read RFC 7.1, and have no problems with that.

Håvard

On 3/24/2011 3:42 PM, Lime, Steve D (DNR) wrote:
> We'd be happy to have more documentation committers...
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: thomas bonfort [mailto:thomas.bonfort at gmail.com]
> Sent: Thursday, March 24, 2011 4:46 AM
> To: Havard Tveite
> Cc: Lime, Steve D (DNR)
> Subject: Re: 6.0 release plan - RFC45 - Consistent units in CLASS->  STYLE
>
> Thanks Havard,
> For the documentation changes, it would probably be easier if you
> could commit directly into the mapserver documentation site. I seem to
> recall that for docs commit access, it is sufficient to post a short
> message to the -dev list stating which areas you want to work on, and
> your osgeo userid.
>
> ps: good news for rfc45, I've just been on the phone with a customer
> here in france who will probably be funding the anchorpoint stuff :)
>
> On Thu, Mar 24, 2011 at 10:22, Havard Tveite<havard.tveite at umb.no>  wrote:
>> An updated examples.sym (just the explaining text has changed).
>>
>> Håvard
>>
>> On 3/24/2011 10:17 AM, Håvard Tveite wrote:
>>>
>>> Very nice!
>>>
>>> How can I help updating the documentation?
>>>
>>> Another thing:
>>> I looked at the 6beta distribution and found that there
>>> was a symbol directory.
>>> I have updated the files in that directory to use the
>>> Mapserver 6 mechanisms.  You will find the new files
>>> attached.  I have also included two PNG files that show
>>> the images produced by the previous map and symbol files
>>> using Mapserver 5.2 (example-org.png) and my updated
>>> files using 6beta3 (example.png).
>>> I have only updated the existing examples, but could
>>> add other (more advanced) examples if you like.
>>>
>>> Håvard
>>>
>>> On 3/23/2011 4:07 PM, thomas bonfort wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Havard,
>>>> fixed in trunk, please confirm ;)
>>>>
>>>> thanks for testing!
>>>>
>>>> thomas
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Mar 22, 2011 at 15:27, Havard Tveite<havard.tveite at umb.no>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Dear Thomas and Steve,
>>>>>
>>>>> I have now tested quite a bit on 6beta2.
>>>>> Many improvements!
>>>>>
>>>>> I have one big concern that I think needs to be addressed
>>>>> for 6.0:
>>>>>
>>>>> Units in LAYER->     CLASS->     STYLE
>>>>> ------------------------------
>>>>> The units used for the different elements of the STYLE now
>>>>> vary, and I think that will be very confusing to the users.
>>>>> * WIDTH and SIZE specifies the width/height of the line/symbol
>>>>>    as the number of pixels/map units at the scale
>>>>>    1:SYMBOLSCALEDENOM.  I like this!
>>>>> * GAP uses the same units (that is the gap in pixels/map units
>>>>>    at the scale 1:SYMBOLSCALEDENOM).  I like this!
>>>>> * PATTERN uses the WIDTH of the line as the unit, so to get
>>>>>    the gap as the number of pixels/map units at the scale
>>>>>    1:SYMBOLSCALEDENOM, you have to multiply the GAP value by
>>>>>    the value of WIDTH.  I don't like this!
>>>>> * OFFSET seems to use the same approach as PATTERN when
>>>>>    "displacing" lines (units relative to line WIDTH).
>>>>>    For point symbols, it seems to use the same approach as GAP
>>>>>    (pixels/map units at the scale 1:SYMBOLSCALEDENOM).
>>>>>
>>>>> My opinion is that the unit used for all the length/width/size
>>>>> measure elements (GAP, OFFSET, PATTERN, SIZE, WIDTH) of
>>>>> CLASS->     STYLE should be the number of pixels/map units at the
>>>>> scale 1:SYMBOLSCALEDENOM (as is currently the case for WIDTH,
>>>>> SIZE and GAP).  This would mean that the units used for
>>>>> PATTERN and OFFSET (for lines) would have to be changed.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Håvard
>>>>>
>>>>> On 11/18/2010 4:13 PM, thomas bonfort wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Havard,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> rfc45 isn't dead, but the priority now is getting 6.0 out of the door,
>>>>>> so I wouldn't expect those features by then.
>>>>>> Once 6.0 is out, getting those features in is a matter of time and/or
>>>>>> will and/or funding.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> cheers,
>>>>>> thomas
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Tue, Nov 9, 2010 at 16:23, Havard Tveite<havard.tveite at umb.no>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Dear Steve and Thomas,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I have been extremely busy this summer and autumn, so I
>>>>>>> have not been able to follow Mapserver developments very
>>>>>>> closely.  But when I heard about the release plan for 6.0,
>>>>>>> I thought about RFC45.  There has been some interest
>>>>>>> during the last years for some of the suggestions there,
>>>>>>> and I still think that it includes some very good ideas
>>>>>>> for quality improvements of Mapserver symbol rendering.
>>>>>>> I have kept track of the progress on Cairo, so I don't know
>>>>>>> if anything of this has been addressed there.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Here are some examples:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Stable origin for tile generation + polygon fill symbols:
>>>>>>>     This would require that for instance the coordinate system
>>>>>>>     origo be used instead of a local origo when placing tiles
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Angle options - there has been some demand for compass (the
>>>>>>>     current vector? default).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Possibility to specify symbol origin for precise placement
>>>>>>>     of symbols.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> And more.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Someone more familiar with the Mapserver code should perhaps
>>>>>>> go through RFC45 again and check what can be achieved for 6.0.
>>>>>>> I may have the time in a few weeks to help with specifications.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Håvard Tveite
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 11/9/2010 8:59 AM, thomas bonfort wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Mon, Nov 8, 2010 at 18:07, Lime, Steve D (DNR)
>>>>>>>> <Steve.Lime at state.mn.us>         wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> RFC-50: I think this is out for 6.0 unless those authors are still
>>>>>>>>> around.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> yes definitely. I'd like to tackle that one some day, but haven't got
>>>>>>>> the time in the near future
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> RFC-52: The changes I’d like to see are relatively minor (from a
>>>>>>>>> coding
>>>>>>>>> perspective) and are a return to a single getShape() method in
>>>>>>>>> MapScript.
>>>>>>>>> It
>>>>>>>>> will break 5.6 scripts but is simpler in the long run. I don’t know
>>>>>>>>> that
>>>>>>>>> an
>>>>>>>>> RFC is necessary but I will start a ticket and we can go from there.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> RFC-54: I think Thomas just needs to merge?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I'm planning to do this before the end of the month. It might slip a
>>>>>>>> bit from the planned 15th november
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> RFC-58 – RFC-63: Are all basically complete, perhaps need docs
>>>>>>>>> though.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> RFC58 (kml) still needs a bit of love before being ready
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> RFC-64: Needs feedback. This may push us back a week or two
>>>>>>>>> depending
>>>>>>>>> on
>>>>>>>>> feedback. I think 6.0 is the right time to implement though given
>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>> types
>>>>>>>>> of proposed changes. They are not candidates for minor releases.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Thanks for pushing on this…
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Steve
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> From: mapserver-dev-bounces at lists.osgeo.org
>>>>>>>>> [mailto:mapserver-dev-bounces at lists.osgeo.org] On Behalf Of Tamas
>>>>>>>>> Szekeres
>>>>>>>>> Sent: Saturday, November 06, 2010 6:12 PM
>>>>>>>>> To: mapserver-dev at lists.osgeo.org
>>>>>>>>> Subject: [mapserver-dev] 6.0 release plan
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Hi All,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> In search of my memory (and my mails) the recent plan of the 6.0
>>>>>>>>> release
>>>>>>>>> has
>>>>>>>>> been scheduled as follows:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> "Plan for a feature freeze on Nov 15th, with a little over 2 months
>>>>>>>>> for
>>>>>>>>> betas, aiming for final release between Jan 15th and 31st"
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> How do we stand with the upcoming activities in the light of this?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I can see the following RFCs may be affected or must be scheduled:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> RFC-50 (OpenGL)
>>>>>>>>> RFC-52 (One-pass query processing), we wanted to do some rework as
>>>>>>>>> far
>>>>>>>>> as
>>>>>>>>> I
>>>>>>>>> remember.
>>>>>>>>> RFC-54 (Rendering overhaul)
>>>>>>>>> RFC-58 (KML output)
>>>>>>>>> RFC-62 (Additional WFS GetFeature Output Formats)
>>>>>>>>> RFC-63 (OpenLayers viewer)
>>>>>>>>> RFC-64 (Expression parser overhaul)
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Do we have any other plan which will be covered with an RFC soon?
>>>>>>>>> How
>>>>>>>>> much
>>>>>>>>> time the pending efforts will take to be implemented?
>>>>>>>>> The 6.0 release plan document may also updated with some up to date
>>>>>>>>> information if possible.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Best regards,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Tamas
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>> mapserver-dev mailing list
>>>>>>>>> mapserver-dev at lists.osgeo.org
>>>>>>>>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/mapserver-dev
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>> mapserver-dev mailing list
>>>>>>>> mapserver-dev at lists.osgeo.org
>>>>>>>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/mapserver-dev
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> Håvard Tveite
>>>>>>> Department of Mathematical Sciences and Technology, UMB
>>>>>>> Drøbakveien 31, POBox 5003, N-1432 Ås, NORWAY
>>>>>>> Phone: +47 64965483 Fax: +47 64965401 http://www.umb.no/imt/
>>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Håvard Tveite
>>>>> Department of Mathematical Sciences and Technology, UMB
>>>>> Drøbakveien 31, POBox 5003, N-1432 Ås, NORWAY
>>>>> Phone: +47 64965483 Fax: +47 64965401 http://www.umb.no/imt/
>>>>>
>>>
>>
>> --
>> Håvard Tveite
>> Department of Mathematical Sciences and Technology, UMB
>> Drøbakveien 31, POBox 5003, N-1432 Ås, NORWAY
>> Phone: +47 64965483 Fax: +47 64965401 http://www.umb.no/imt/
>>
>

-- 
Håvard Tveite
Department of Mathematical Sciences and Technology, UMB
Drøbakveien 31, POBox 5003, N-1432 Ås, NORWAY
Phone: +47 64965483 Fax: +47 64965401 http://www.umb.no/imt/

More information about the mapserver-dev mailing list