[mapserver-users] Mapserver.org sample ...

[Bob Basques]

Chris,

The biggest piece I see GeoMoose contributing to, is the CGI calling methods.  GeoMoose makes extensive use of the ImageMap building and Query Mechanisms available with MapServer, not just the image rendering.  Although the stacking of the images inside of the GeoMoose interface is and has been a novel way of presenting the MapServer contructs (IMO).  OpenLayers does this as well to some degree, but I believe the GeoMoose interface provides a greater degree of end user control.

I'm interested in promoting more than just MapServer image rendering.  Using Mapserver's CGI capabilities with a Client LIB is pretty much the way I've used MapServer since starting up with it over ten years ago.  The imagemap (templating) and Query capabilities are just as important as the image rendering.  The teaching reference below, was aimed squarely at the idea of using MapServer via it's CGI calling structure, which I've always thought should be demo-ified in some location.  But since MapServer (and it's community) hasn't in the past had any particular interest in ratifying a client for use, I never pursued the idea.  But now, with that nice OpenLayers window on the MapServer page, the sky's the limit so to speak, as far as setting up demos and including them in the MapServer site, or at least it seems like it should be.

:c)


bobb



>>> Christopher Schmidt <crschmidt at metacarta.com> 01/14/09 10:37 AM >>>
On Wed, Jan 14, 2009 at 09:21:38AM -0600, Bob Basques wrote:
> All,
> 
> The only reason I brought it up at all, was that I was playing around 
> with Openlayers myself this week.
> 
> I pretty much copied the "Demo" from the MapServer website.  Sounds like 
> that was the wrong to go  :c)

Absolutely. The demo on the MapServer site is using a layer that is
generally not needed in any application -- at least not until you're
looking for something that can be deployed without a MapServer 'server'
in the mix.
> Benefits of GeoMoose (Main ones) for the normal user.
> 
>    * Fast (because of MapServer tuning.).  Smaller footprint

The dem on the MapServer main site seems pretty fast to me. Much faster
than any non-cached demo I've seen. Are you saying that GeoMoose has
tuned MapServer t such an extent that it is faster to render images than
it is to serve pre-rendered tiles that demonstrate MapServer's rendering
skills?

>    * Handles many layers with ease.  The limit is the client hardware,
>      and the control is given to the user as to how many to display.

This is a GeoMoose benefit over other client software, but I don't see
how it makes a better demo of MapServer's rendering capabilities.  

>    * The publishing of the data can be distributed, down to the layer
>      level, including the contents of the popups.  Each layer can be
>      managed separately without consequence to the rest of the
>      interface, if it breaks, only that layer is not available.

This is a GeoMoose benefit over other client software, but I don't see
how it makes a better demo of MapServer's rendering capabilities.  

>    * More interface user Control, layer fading, on/off, stacking order,
>      popup on/off.

This is a GeoMoose benefit over other client software, but I don't see
how it makes a better demo of MapServer's rendering capabilities.  

>    * And it's all a client lib as well, just like Openlayers.  Closer
>      than you think.

This is a GeoMoose benefit over other client software, but I don't see
how it makes a better demo of MapServer's rendering capabilities.  

>    * If I had to teach MapServer request strategies, I would use
>      MapServer + GeoMoose + Firebug to do it.  GeoMoose uses the CGI
>      functionality for images, imagemaps, and querying.

I don't knwo what you mean by this, so I can't comment on it.

> Not that I'm trying to defend GeoMoose.  Just wanted to know how to join 
> in on popularizing MapServer.

GeoMoose has many advantages over other client software, if you are
demonstrating client software. The MapServer homepage should be a quick,
simple, easy to use demonstration of MapServer capabilties -- in this
case, a pretty map. I can see an argument that the MapSerer homepage
should use a static image instead, but I think that is a less effective
demonstration of the pretty rendering. I do not think that changing from
OpenLayers givves a better demonstration of *MapServer*'s rendering
capabilties, and I can't imagine a more effective demo could be created
against static content.

> Also, I think our definitions of RESTful are slightly different.  I 
> would say that GeoMoose is very (VERY)  ReSTfully designed.

ReST is "Restructured Text", the format used by the MapServer
documentation. 

Regards,
-- 
Christopher Schmidt
MetaCarta