[mapserver-dev] MS RFC 87: Bitmap pattern support
Lime, Steve D (DNR)
Steve.Lime at state.mn.us
Thu Jan 17 14:58:27 PST 2013
I think BITMAP is just used as a font type so why couldn't it be re-used in this case? We do that elsewhere.
Beside the name I wondered about external file support (the old bpm being one). Defining inline looks tedious.
From: mapserver-dev-bounces at lists.osgeo.org [mailto:mapserver-dev-bounces at lists.osgeo.org] On Behalf Of Havard Tveite
Sent: Tuesday, January 15, 2013 4:32 AM
To: mapserver-dev at lists.osgeo.org
Subject: Re: [mapserver-dev] MS RFC 87: Bitmap pattern support
This would be a nice feature.
I was wondering if SYMBOL type "RASTER" could be an alternative to "PATTERNMAP"?
Why? "VECTOR" is now used for creating shapes / patterns using lines, so why not use "RASTER" to create shapes / patterns using pixels.
I agree that "BITMAP" would have been even better.
It would still be useful to have scalable patterns that were not anti-aliased (to avoid edge effects when "tiling" polygons). These would have to be specified using the vector approach, but could be changed to a raster representation before going to the final rendering. In the map file, it could be achieved by using symbol type vector with the old (now GD specific) ANTIALIAS keyword.
I don't know how difficult it would be to achieve this with the current rendering approach, but your implementation of "PATTERNMAP" could perhaps be of use in some way.
On 1/14/2013 11:30 PM, Tamas Szekeres wrote:
> I have added a new RFC document proposing a solution for creating bitmap patterns. This is in fact a new symbol type PATTERNMAP (wanted to use BITMAP but it was already reserved for other purposes) which is aware of color and backgroundcolor settings and rendered equally well with the various kind of renderers. Currently we have no such option to achieve the same result, by using vector symbols we can not provide the same look for most of the renderers (agg, cairo), due to the possible antialiasing behaviour of the line drawings.
> Please find the complete RFC document at this location:
> I have also created a tracking ticket for this addition:
> The corresponding implementation has been added to this branch:
> I have also prepared a sample test case providing to implement all the mapinfo symbols for auto style (see result image attached to this post):
> Let me know about your opinion.
> Best regards,
mapserver-dev mailing list
mapserver-dev at lists.osgeo.org
More information about the mapserver-dev