[OpenLayers-Dev] bbox strategy and zooming

Tim Schaub tschaub at opengeo.org
Sat Nov 15 14:42:28 EST 2008


Hey-

Ivan Grcic wrote:
> There you go: a ticket and an example
> http://trac.openlayers.org/ticket/1835
> http://dev.openlayers.org/sandbox/igrcic/openlayers/examples/strategy-bbox.html

Thanks for the detail.  The strategy was not registering for layer 
visibilitychanged.  The patch for 1835 corrects this.

Tim

> 
> Cheers, Ivan
> On Fri, Nov 14, 2008 at 5:40 PM, Tim Schaub <tschaub at opengeo.org> wrote:
>> Hey-
>>
>> Ivan Grcic wrote:
>>> Hi, ive tried Tims patch and i must say im pretty happy with it. Tnx Tim!
>>>
>>> I dont need to filter data depending on number of features
>>> (maxfeatures), but to show all the currently available data for area,
>>> then the cluster strategy jumps in and takes care that there are not
>>> too many features rendered. Perfect.
>>>
>>> Now the only problem is that one when upon activateing layer, it has
>>> to be nudged a bit for features to load (moveend effect)
>>>
>> Ivan, can you open a ticket and post an example that reproduces this
>> specific problem?  It would be great to have a record of it.  Also, if
>> you write back here with the ticket number, it would be good to have as
>> part of this thread.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Tim
>>
>>>
>>> On Thu, Nov 13, 2008 at 9:08 PM, Eric Lemoine <eric.c2c at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> Thanks for putting this patch together Tim.
>>>>
>>>> Initially Chris wanted that the bbox strategy behave aggressively on
>>>> zoom in, but, as an optimization, only if the number of features in
>>>> the layer is not lower than the maxfeatures value set in the protocol.
>>>>
>>>> The change you're proposing wouldn't allow this. The change I proposed
>>>> involved adding a new Integer option to the bbox strategy. If that
>>>> option is null the strategy behaves as currently. If it's non-null
>>>> then it behaves aggressively if the number of features in the layer is
>>>> not lower than the option value.
>>>>
>>>> Chris was concerned with configuration data duplication - maxfeatures
>>>> is kinda set in the protocol as well as in the strategy; which doesn't
>>>> bother me actually.
>>>>
>>>> You may concerned with the fact that my proposed option targets a
>>>> specific case (maxfeatures-parameterized requests) and doesn't address
>>>> other, maybe more common, cases. I actually don't see other cases when
>>>> a more aggressive mode makes sense, but that's probably just me.
>>>>
>>>> Cheers,
>>>>
>>>> Eric
>>>>
>>>> 2008/11/13, Tim Schaub <tschaub at opengeo.org>:
>>>>> Hey-
>>>>>
>>>>> Christopher Schmidt wrote:
>>>>>> I'm still lost as to how to go about coding what I want :) I want to
>>>>>> have maxfeatures, and more aggressive invalidation because of it. Any
>>>>>> suggestinos as to how I might go about implementing that, or should I
>>>>>> just toss together something and people will look at afterwards?
>>>>>>
>>>>> If you haven't already tossed something together, see the patch for
>>>>> http://trac.openlayers.org/ticket/1830.
>>>>>
>>>>> Set resFactor to 1 if you want to request features with every change in
>>>>> resolution.
>>>>>
>>>>> Tim
>>>>>
>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>> --
>>>>> Tim Schaub
>>>>> OpenGeo - http://opengeo.org
>>>>> Expert service straight from the developers.
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Dev mailing list
>>>>> Dev at openlayers.org
>>>>> http://openlayers.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
>>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Dev mailing list
>>>> Dev at openlayers.org
>>>> http://openlayers.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>> --
>> Tim Schaub
>> OpenGeo - http://opengeo.org
>> Expert service straight from the developers.
>> _______________________________________________
>> Dev mailing list
>> Dev at openlayers.org
>> http://openlayers.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
>>
> 
> 
> 


-- 
Tim Schaub
OpenGeo - http://opengeo.org
Expert service straight from the developers.



More information about the Dev mailing list