[OpenLayers-Dev] layer order in findLayers() of WMSGetFeatureInfo and WMTSGetFeatureInfo controls

[Bart van den Eijnden]

Hi Marc,

okay, I see your point now.

Feel free to open up a ticket for making the layer order in QUERY_LAYERS the same as for LAYERS for the WMSGetFeatureInfo control.

TIA.

Best regards,
Bart

-- 
Looking for flexible support on OpenLayers or GeoExt? Please check out http://www.osgis.nl/support.html

Bart van den Eijnden
OSGIS
bartvde at osgis.nl

On Apr 8, 2011, at 12:46 PM, Marc Jansen wrote:

> Hi Bart,
> 
> I am currently looking at application code that registers an eventlistener to getfetureinfo on the WMSGetFeatureInfoControl.
> 
> In that handler all results except for the first a thrown away. UMN Mapserver in that particular case returns the results for the particular location in the order they were requested.
> 
> The current logic in WMSGetFeatureInfo orders the layers for GetMap in a different Way than for GetFeatureInfo. For UMN this results in a setup where one only sees a feature from layer B (it is drawn atop a feature at the same location from layer A) and the first result of the GFI is the feature from layer A.
> 
> I am totally unsure what (if any) sorting is being applied to results of getFeatureInfo-results by the various WMS-implementations or what the standard says.
> 
> At least for UMN the order seems to be relevant.
> 
> I know that the application code could be refactored to examine the results and find the correct one, but I also see UMN mapserver behaving as one might (!) expect it to do:
> 
> Draw layer B atop of A => REQUEST=GetMap&LAYERS=A,B
> Query Layer for Feature Info => REQUEST=GetFeatureInfo&QUERY_LAYERS=B,A
> 
> I am just unsure what the correct behaviour is, and if we should ignore the fact that UMN does respect the order of QUERY_LAYERS.
> 
> I hope my point is somehow clear and not to insignificant (Maybe I should not be working on this after a week of conference-stress ;-)).
> 
> Regards,
> Marc
> 
> 
> 
> On 08.04.2011 10:30, Bart van den Eijnden wrote:
>> Hi Marc,
>> 
>> I did not see how the confusing behaviour could be reached, since FEATURE_COUNT is on a *per layer* basis AFAIK.
>> 
>> So if there are features in both layers on the clicked point and FEATURE_COUNT is 1, you will always get back 2 features.
>> 
>> Or am I missing something here?
>> 
>> Best regards,
>> Bart
>> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Dev mailing list
> Dev at lists.osgeo.org
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/openlayers-dev
>