[Qgis-developer] Snapping tolerance
denis.rouzaud at gmail.com
Sun Dec 14 22:41:02 PST 2014
On 14.12.2014 15:12, Zoltan Szecsei wrote:
> On 2014/12/14 15:20, Rouzaud Denis wrote:
>> From my point of view, the settings of snapping are far too advanced
>> for 95% of the usage. Let’s not make them even more complicated, just
>> for a very specific use case.
> Hi Denis,
> I have to disagree with you, as someone who does a fair amount of
> To support Ramon, I too work with many map layers in many different
> projections, so we mustn't lose facilities that we (even by accident)
> Some points:
> * Being able to set a global tolerance in linear units, and have
> QGIS convert that to the relevant layer CRS would be VERY useful.
> ie: I want a 10m snapping tolerance even if I am on a LatLong map
well, the case you mention is not feasible today in QGIS and will be
handled by my proposal of having the "map units" and dropping "layer units".
> * QGIS only allows Snap Modes "To Vertex", "To Segment" or "To
> Vertex and Segment"
> What if both a Line-end and a Vertex on that same line is within
> We really need to differentiate between Point (the Start & End
> Vertex of a Line or Polygon), Vertex and Segment AND be able to
> set the Snapping order between those three components of a
> graphical entity.
> * The snapping order between layers is currently set to the order of
> the maps in your Layer Tree. Depending on the features you are
> digitising, this is not optimal as one often needs to have a layer
> snapping order different from the viewing order.
> * It would be useful to set the layer snapping order in the Snapping
> Options table, and have the _option_ (and not enforced by the
> developer) to prioritise the current map being edited.
> * If I remember correctly, snapping returns a position from the
> first layer it finds anything in, and IIRC if there are multiple
> snaps on that layer, the closest is returned? What if there are
> still unsearched layers that might have something within tolerance?
I agree with these points but they are not related to the question of
the units for the snapping.
We do a lot of digitizing too, and what I've noticed:
* 95% of the time, the precision is given in pixels because that's the
most natural to work with (no scale dependency).
* for the rest, working in the project unit is ideal.
What is the chance of working with a layer with a projection on a
project in geographic coordinates and do digitizing?
Maybe, there will be a very specific use-case for layer units.
But, for me the aim of QGIS is to stay the most intuitive possible and
not to be weighed down under tons of configuration possibilities.
Also, I do believe it will make the code more complex (Martin?).
That's my main two reasons for not keeping the "layer units".
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Qgis-developer