Thanks for the feedback, Even. If there is no other feedback in the next few days I will merge the change, as well as an extra code fix to implement change 8.
On 2 January 2018 at 21:47, Even Rouault <even.roua...@spatialys.com> wrote: >> 5. [...] change the definition of >> ogr-brush-1 to mean a solid fill in the selected background color; >> change the suggested default for BRUSH bc to transparent >> (#FFFFFF00). > > I'd suggest that we add a rule so as to keep the current semantics: if > ogr-brush-1 is used, then bc must be omitted (or set to a color with > alpha=0). It would be confusing to have the possibility to have 2 ways to > express a solid fill with either ogr-brush-0 + fc or ogr-brush-1 + bc. So > people wanting a solid fill should use ogr-brush-0 (or don't specify it) > I expected that this might be a problematic change. I'm happy to leave ogr-brush-1 alone. If existing code is already special-casing ogr-brush-1, then keeping the spec the way it is would be less confusing. Therefore line 492 will say "null brush (transparent - no fill, irrespective of fc or bc values)". Alan -- Alan Thomas Software Developer ThinkSpatial http://www.thinkspatial.com.au _______________________________________________ gdal-dev mailing list gdal-dev@lists.osgeo.org https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/gdal-dev