Hello Saul, It is not difficult to your point, and anyone working with a real world GIS system knows about it.
I have designed more complex styles, I normally refer to what you call the "label shield", a text back and it extends to cover callout. It has at least a text box, which defines and controls its bounds...can defined fixed bounds as you shown in the picture or the bounds is automatically determined from the actual text content etc Unless the OGC members want to say, SLD is complete, I see no point in your rejection of your proposal. In fact, if I were a member I will have rather used GeoTools to extensively develop/experiment and move ideas here to specs instead of coming out with untested specs. Now, I have a work to do - I leave this topic. Best regards, Paul. > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf > Of Saul Farber > Sent: Friday, November 11, 2005 1:51 AM > To: Ian Turton > Cc: jgarnett; Paul Selormey; David Zwiers; > [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [email protected] > Subject: Re: [Geotools-devel] VOTE - label "shield" streaming > renderer patch > > Hey all, > > I guess since I wrote this patch I ought to defend it a bit, > at the least just to play devil's advocate! > > First off, to address Ian's point, the label-shield patch > improves symbolization over a pair of symbolizers by allowing > the graphic to appear directly underneath the label in all > cases. For example, how would you symbolize a labeled > interstate freeway with an interstate shield underneath which > has three labels along it's length? Something like the > attached image isn't possible (as I understand it) to render > on-the-fly with just two symbolizers. > > More generally, isn't this the point of a good labeler? A > more standards-compliant way of implementing this > functionality would be to add a <Vendor > name="labelURL">http://my-label-url</Vendor> tag to the > output, but isn't it more elegant and less code-intensive to > just use the well-designed and well-written > <Graphic></Graphic> tag instead? > Label shields aren't exactly controversial, are they? It > seems very beneficial to be able to render appealing maps > with nice colored alpha-blended interstate road-shields > underneath the labels, no? > > > In my specific situation, this is a real-world requirement > which geoserver needed to support in order for us to consider > using it in our production web-mapping environment. We also > need to support SDE-stored raster data--I'll be chatting with > Alessio when that time comes...soon I hope! This change > doesn't shrink the available rendering options in > geotools/server, and if it caused any previously valid SLD > documents to become invalid, I would think that fact grounds > for rejections. But it doesn't *shrink* the space of > render-able SLD documents, it simply extends it in a logical > manner to support a real-world need. > > > In the end, it's not of large consequence to myself or my > organization whether this patch gets accepted. It's a > real-world necessity that this functionality be present for > us, so I'll simply maintain the patch against whichever > branch of geotools the geoserver trunk is using and make it > available for download to those who would like label shields. > > However, I think this functionality is a credit to geoserver. > It makes it able to generate better maps in a tiny way, and > if the reason for rejecting it is that it provides a proper > superset the OGC specification by extending SLD in a fairly > logical manner, I think that's a pretty weak reason. > > > Either way, geoserver completely rocks. This code is > fantastic, and when our multiple-server, load-balanced, > 100,000-maps-a-day infrastructure is up and running on a > geoserver-based platform, I'll be sure to post a good > technical discussion of how we've set up our "enterprise" (I > also hate that word) mapping platform on an open-source foundation. > > Great work guys, and I hope that you'll bring the > label-shields code under your wings. But if not, that's cool > too...I'll figure some other way to get this functionality to > other folks who want it. > > > Thanks all! > --saul > > > > > On Thu, 2005-11-10 at 15:51 +0000, Ian Turton wrote: > > -1 I originally commented that I didn't really see how this > improved > > over a pair of symbolisers (one to d the graphic and one to do the > > text). > > > > Ian > > PS 2/6ths of the the OGC sld team are geotools developers > so it would > > be nice if we did support the spec, but also if people really think > > this is necessary then we can take it to the spec discussions. > > -- > > > > Ian Turton > > http://www.geotools.org > > http://www.ccg.leeds.ac.uk > ------------------------------------------------------- SF.Net email is sponsored by: Tame your development challenges with Apache's Geronimo App Server. Download it for free - -and be entered to win a 42" plasma tv or your very own Sony(tm)PSP. Click here to play: http://sourceforge.net/geronimo.php _______________________________________________ Geotools-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geotools-devel
