[OpenLayers-Dev] Map event confusion

[Frederic Junod]

Hi,

Yes, please open a ticket.
IMHO, dragstart, drag and dragend can be delete right now: the api
docs says "Does not work" for about one year.

fredj

On Fri, Mar 26, 2010 at 12:47 PM, Marc Jansen <jansen at terrestris.de> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> so do you all think I should open up a ticket with milestone 2.10
> including a patch that does
>
>    * leave the events in the EVENT_TYPES array as they currently are
>    * but changes the documentation to not reference the events
>          o addmarker,
>          o removemarker,
>          o clearmarkers,
>          o dragstart,
>          o dragend,
>          o drag,
>          o popupopen,
>          o popupclose anymore?
>    * should I add yet another ticket to remove the unneeded events in 3.0?
>
> What do you think? I am willing to provide a patch for the above ticket.
>
> Regards and thanks for your opinions,
> Marc
>
>
> Stephen Woodbridge schrieb:
>> Christopher Schmidt wrote:
>>
>>> On Thu, Mar 25, 2010 at 03:32:36PM -0600, Tim Schaub wrote:
>>>
>>>> Marc Jansen wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Hi devs,
>>>>>
>>>>> I am rather confused about the documentation about map-events. Is it
>>>>> right that
>>>>>
>>>>>     * addmarker,
>>>>>     * removemarker,
>>>>>     * clearmarkers,
>>>>>     * dragstart,
>>>>>     * dragend,
>>>>>     * drag
>>>>>
>>>>> are defined but never get triggered?
>>>>>
>>>>> If so, they should IMHO be removed from the EVENT_TYPES-array and the
>>>>> documentation for that.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> The problem with removing things from the EVENT_TYPES array is that
>>>> there could be applications that have subscribers for them and use
>>>> map.events to publish.
>>>>
>>>> If we remove those entries, those applications break.
>>>>
>>>> I know this is silly.  You are right to point out that there is little
>>>> sense and lots of confusion in having them.
>>>>
>>>> Our safest bet is to mark them as unused and remove them in 3.0.  If
>>>> others think the caution is not needed, I wouldn't be opposed to
>>>> removing them.
>>>>
>>> In general, I'm supportive of any changes that make things simpler which
>>> means that applications that did not throw errorrs in earlier releases will
>>> continue to not throw errors in future releases.
>>>
>>> In this particular case, it's hard to imagine that someone has written
>>> code that specifically registers for an event that doesn't do anything.
>>>
>>> With sufficient documentation, I'd be willing to change the code to not
>>> have those events. However,  since events (unlike methods) are not actually
>>> in existence in the Natural Docs except if they're documented, I think
>>> it would be equally successful -- for anyone who isn't actually digging
>>> into the code itself, a fact that describes more and more of our users --
>>> to just not document those events. At that point, the events simply
>>> 'disappear' from the docs completely without any other work on our
>>> part.
>>>
>>> -- Chris
>>>
>>
>> Chris, et al,
>>
>> I can appreciate this sentiment, I think there are a lot of "casual"
>> users that will not dig into the code and in those cases, if it is not
>> in the docs then the problem does indeed go away. But there are a small
>> but healthy number of "coders" who are trying to do more with OpenLayers
>> like Marc, myself and others I'm sure that do dig into the code and
>> spend a lot of time chasing our tails, aka: learning? :) because we try
>> something like an event that never gets triggered and then scratch our
>> heads for a while trying to figure out why. We eventually do figure it
>> out or ask and get help. I would like to see doc that better explains
>> what events exist and what gets passed to them. I have also noticed that
>> there is a trend to move away from callbacks, which were somewhat better
>> documented, in favor of using events (or maybe I'm mistaken) and some
>> objects say register for such and such event to get notified when
>> something happens, but there is no additional information as to what is
>> passed to the event, etc.
>>
>> Regardless, I'm loving OL and continued to be impressed by how much is
>> built into OL and how easy OL is to extend once I can get my head to
>> think about the problem in in the right way.
>>
>> Thanks all and best regards,
>>    -Steve
>>
>>
>>>> Tim
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Please ignore the mail if I missed something fundamental (but please
>>>>> enlighten me where these events are triggered)
>>>>>
>>>>> Regards,
>>>>> Marc
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> 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
>>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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
>



-- 
Frédéric Junod
Camptocamp SA