[QGIS-Developer] Generic use of QgsLocator and friends?

[Richard Duivenvoorde]

See inline

On 02-10-17 02:06, Nyall Dawson wrote:
> On 26 September 2017 at 17:03, Richard Duivenvoorde <rdmailings at duif.net> wrote:
>> I agree with your point that multiple search-like widgets would clutter
>> the interface, but I think a generic geocoder search widget could be a
>> good candidate for for a second search widget
>> Again plz see: https://github.com/qgis/QGIS-Enhancement-Proposals/issues/64
> 
> I (respectfully!) disagree. I think we diminish the usefulness of both
> the geocoder and the locator if we split them into separate widgets,
> further complexify the UI, and make things harder for plugin devs who
> then need to decide between two mostly-overlapping interfaces to
> utilise.

No worries, after some rethinking I'm with you now :-)

>> - make the search a dockable widget (so free to use it in whatever toolbar)
> 
> Given the above, I'm a -1 here. BUT if the only other alternative is
> two separate locator widgets, then I'll bend and compromise, and
> suggest: "locator is in the bottom left. But you can turn on a
> "locator" toolbar, and if you do that, the widget moves from the
> bottom left up to the toolbar. Close the toolbar, and it goes back to
> the lower left."

Yes, yes! But maybe first wait for my first geocoder implementation.
I'm planning either to bring Nominatim or our national geocoder in it
(in Python first)...

>> Some features I would be happy with then:
...
>> - make the number of results a setting (now a hardcoded 30)
> 
> Configurable to users? Or plugins devs?

I think api would be fine, it could be one of the settings of a given
locator. Take the largest number from all locators?

> Please don't read this email in the wrong way - i don't want it to
> come across aggressive. Rather I'm also passionate about making
> geocoding/searching better in QGIS, and I'm really glad to see this
> discussion happening.

Again, no worries, I'm ok with some disagreement and discussion. I'm a
'meritocrat', given all your work (and thinking and communicating) you
have a lot of credits to disagree ;-)

Regards,

Richard