Can you post images showing the difference and a full layer definition? >>> On 2/27/2009 at 10:08 AM, in message <1235750919604-2396527.p...@n2.nabble.com>, paalkr <pal.kristen...@statkart.no> wrote:
> Hi all! > > I'm trying out 5.4 b1 at the moment, and there seems to be something going > on with labels. With an identical mapfile, 5.2.1 and 5.4 b1 behaves > different when it comes to label placement. The data source is a point > feature class (added as TYPE annotation), and the label is held in place > with all possible methods to prevent clipping with tile output. The problem > is that with 5.4 b1 there seems to be a larger occurrences of clipped > labels, then with 5.2.1. > > Snippet from mapfile > > PROCESSING "LABEL_NO_CLIP=True" > LABEL > COLOR 168 112 0 > OUTLINECOLOR 254 254 254 > TYPE TRUETYPE > FONT "SkHelveticaMA" > SIZE 10 > ENCODING "UTF-8" > ANTIALIAS TRUE > POSITION cc > FORCE TRUE > PARTIALS FALSE > END > > Regards, > Pål Kristensen > > -- > View this message in context: > http://n2.nabble.com/PROCESSING-%22LABEL_NO_CLIP%3DTrue%22-not-working-with-5 > .4-beta--tp2396527p2396527.html > Sent from the Mapserver - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > > _______________________________________________ > mapserver-users mailing list > mapserver-users@lists.osgeo.org > http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/mapserver-users _______________________________________________ mapserver-users mailing list mapserver-users@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/mapserver-users