![]() |
|
|
|
|
Issue Type:
|
![Improvement]() Improvement
|
|
Affects Versions:
|
2.4.2 |
|
Assignee:
|
Andrea Aime
|
|
Components:
|
WMS |
|
Created:
|
29/Nov/13 9:44 AM
|
|
Description:
|
This improvement is tightly related to following user-list threads and tickets :
http://osgeo-org.1560.x6.nabble.com/Buffer-parameter-in-WMS-Getmap-request-td5080132.html
http://osgeo-org.1560.x6.nabble.com/weird-rendering-when-specifiyng-buffer-parameter-on-layergroups-containing-raster-data-layers-td5091020.html
http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/GEOS-6180
Here is a short description of our need and some thoughts
about how it could be solved:
- our need is to map a large area (France) tiling it with
tiles of various sizes (typically 20 km). The main point
is that some of our labels are placed by a home made
software (they don't overlap each others and must not be
displaced), and some are placed by geoserver with a lower
priority (ex. rivers).
- to get a correct result, we would need to truncate labels
on border instead of deactivating them, even when conflict resolution=true. In the general case, it may produce
unexpected results. In our case, labels of this layer do not
overlap each others but must be used as obstacles for river
labels. Hence the use of conflictResolution.
May be we could obtain the same result another way if
labelObstacles was available for labels...
- as you mention in a mail, clipping polygons and linestrings
should be deactivated if truncate label on border is activated
- we also think that truncate labels on border should not be used
with maxDisplacements parameter > 0. Not sure if it should be hard
coded or only documented though.
==> currently, we think the most flexible way to enable
label on border would be to have a vendor option distinct
from conflict resolution and with no effect on other
options (except on linestring and polygon clipping).
==> If using label as obstacles and conflict resolution
were two distinct options (if labels could be used as
obstacle for lower priority labels while managing
conflictResolution with labels of same priority),
I think we could avoid the situation where we need
label on border = true and conflict resolution = true.
Hope it makes sense
We'll try to submit a patch for the renderer part on december
|
|
Project:
|
GeoServer
|
|
Priority:
|
![Minor]() Minor
|
|
Reporter:
|
Michaël Michaud
|
|
|
|
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
|
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rapidly troubleshoot problems before they affect your business. Most IT
organizations don't have a clear picture of how application performance
affects their revenue. With AppDynamics, you get 100% visibility into your
Java,.NET, & PHP application. Start your 15-day FREE TRIAL of AppDynamics Pro!
http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=84349351&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk
_______________________________________________
Geoserver-devel mailing list
Geoserver-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geoserver-devel
