[Qgis-developer] Different label distances for point feature labelling

[Neumann, Andreas]

Hi Nyall, 

I would be fine with limiting to the 8 "well-known" positions, with the
priorities mentioned at
http://www.svgopen.org/2002/papers/dahinden__good_map_graphics/labeling.png
[2] set as default and different distances depending on the position -
perhaps with a good default distance for each position, so normal users
wouldn't have to tweak these values and still receive good out of the
box results. 

I wasn't aware that I can bump up the candidates and I doubt this is in
much use out in the wild. 

Thanks,
Andreas 

On 2015-07-20 12:59, Nyall Dawson wrote: 

> On 19 July 2015 at 23:30, Andreas Neumann <a.neumann at carto.net> wrote: 
> 
>> Hi,
>> 
>> I have another label question:
>> 
>> For labeling point features when using the "Around point" placement option,
>> I noticed that I would need different label distances depending on the
>> position the automatic labelling engine uses. As an example, while the label
>> distance is ok for a "top-right" position, it would have to be bigger for a
>> "right" position, as the label is still too close to the point symbol in
>> this case. The top-middle and bottom-middle positions would also need yet
>> another label distance.
>> 
>> Would it be possible to add position-dependent label offsets in the future
>> while still letting QGIS place the labels automatically?
> 
> I've hit this recently too, but I'm not sure what the best solution
> is. There's a few complications. The biggest is that the "around
> point" mode actually places candidates in a circular radius around
> point features. By default QGIS is set to use 8 candidates for point
> features, so the result is that labels are placed in the 8 quadrants
> around points (above, top right, right, bottom right, etc...). But if
> someone has bumped up the number of candidates, then the labels will
> no longer fall on these quadrants and instead be placed at say 10
> degrees, 20 degrees, etc. In this case the position dependant
> distances become much more complicated.
> 
> I've been thinking about changing how "around point" works to
> basically hard-code in the 8 candidates, so that labels will ALWAYS
> fall on the 8 corner/mid points. I'm not sure how many people would be
> negatively affected by this (ie, how many people intentionally change
> the number of candidates), but there's a number of benefits which
> would arise. One would be that we could prioritise certain placements
> - eg, following this [1 [2]] kind of priority for placements. This could
> even be configurable by the user. Another benefit would be that we
> could tweak the relative distances for each placement too.
> 
> Anyone have any thoughts on this?
> 
> Nyall
> 
> [1] http://www.svgopen.org/2002/papers/dahinden__good_map_graphics/labeling.png [2]
> 
>> Thanks,
>> Andreas
>> _______________________________________________
>> Qgis-developer mailing list
>> Qgis-developer at lists.osgeo.org
>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer [1]

 

Links:
------
[1] http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
[2]
http://www.svgopen.org/2002/papers/dahinden__good_map_graphics/labeling.png
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/qgis-developer/attachments/20150720/a625b895/attachment-0001.html>