Re: [Geoserver-devel] GSIP 153 - opaque container layer group mode

Ok, ready for review here: https://github.com/geoserver/geoserver/pull/2048 Cheers Andrea On Wed, Jan 4, 2017 at 1:42 AM, Jody Garnett wrote: > Thanks Kevin. > > I have updated https://github.com/geoserver/geoserver/wiki/GSIP-153 with > the table of responsibilities for

Re: [Geoserver-devel] GSIP 153 - opaque container layer group mode

Thanks Kevin. I have updated https://github.com/geoserver/geoserver/wiki/GSIP-153 with the table of responsibilities for each layer group mode. We could not come up with any good alternate wording, please proceed. -- Jody Garnett On 3 January 2017 at 16:04, Kevin Smith

Re: [Geoserver-devel] GSIP 153 - opaque container layer group mode

On 17-01-03 10:30 AM, Kevin Smith wrote: > I agree both that "opaque container" is a bit ugly and potentially > confusing and that "basemap" is too specific. Maybe a "flat group"? Jody and I just talked this over and I withdraw "flat group". My new suggestion is "Restricted Single" which isn't

Re: [Geoserver-devel] GSIP 153 - opaque container layer group mode

On 16-12-28 12:10 PM, Andrea Aime wrote: > On Wed, Dec 28, 2016 at 1:07 AM, Mike Pumphrey > wrote: > > I know I'm non-voting, but I agree with Jody's point here. Also, > to my mind, "opaque container" is better realized as "black box"

Re: [Geoserver-devel] GSIP 153 - opaque container layer group mode

On Tue, Dec 27, 2016 at 9:57 PM, Ben Caradoc-Davies wrote: > Andrea, > > Jody and I brainstormed GSIP-153 in today's (very small) committee > meeting. In a nutshell, have you considered a single layer group class with > many properties, rather than multiple classes of layer

Re: [Geoserver-devel] GSIP 153 - opaque container layer group mode

I know I'm non-voting, but I agree with Jody's point here. Also, to my mind, "opaque container" is better realized as "black box" (fewer syllables too). But I think "basemap" might get more to the heart of how it would be used. Thanks, Mike Mike Pumphrey Education Program Director | Boundless

Re: [Geoserver-devel] GSIP 153 - opaque container layer group mode

Andrea, Jody and I brainstormed GSIP-153 in today's (very small) committee meeting. In a nutshell, have you considered a single layer group class with many properties, rather than multiple classes of layer group? Jody made a nice table and we listed the properties in bullet points. We also

Re: [Geoserver-devel] GSIP 153 - opaque container layer group mode

Added my +1 on the proposal Cheers On Fri, Dec 23, 2016 at 2:28 AM, Jody Garnett wrote: > +1 on the proposal > > "single basemap" is an alternate for "opaque container" if you are > interested. > On Thu, Dec 22, 2016 at 3:21 PM Jody Garnett >

Re: [Geoserver-devel] GSIP 153 - opaque container layer group mode

+1 on the proposal "single basemap" is an alternate for "opaque container" if you are interested. On Thu, Dec 22, 2016 at 3:21 PM Jody Garnett wrote: > Reading now, tripping up over the naming "*Opaque Container".* > > I usually think of the word opaque as the opposite

Re: [Geoserver-devel] GSIP 153 - opaque container layer group mode

Reading now, tripping up over the naming "*Opaque Container".* I usually think of the word opaque as the opposite of transparent. The main difference in our naming seems to between "single" and "tree". This new layer group type is behaving like a single layer, we just wish the contained layers

Re: [Geoserver-devel] GSIP 153 - opaque container layer group mode

On 2016-12-19 02:47 AM, Andrea Aime wrote: > Hi, > I've follow up with the previous discussion on layer tree modes and > wrote this proposal: > > https://github.com/geoserver/geoserver/wiki/GSIP-153 > > As suggested by Ben I've summarized the existing group behavior for > current layer groups, >

Re: [Geoserver-devel] GSIP 153 - opaque container layer group mode

+1. On 19/12/16 23:47, Andrea Aime wrote: > Hi, > I've follow up with the previous discussion on layer tree modes and wrote > this proposal: > > https://github.com/geoserver/geoserver/wiki/GSIP-153 > > As suggested by Ben I've summarized the existing group behavior for current > layer groups, >

Re: [Geoserver-devel] GSIP 153 - opaque container layer group mode

+1 for me too. I think it would be useful, considering also past email threads on ml. Best Regards, Alessio Fabiani. == GeoServer Professional Services from the experts! Visit http://goo.gl/it488V for more information. == Ing. Alessio Fabiani @alfa7691 Founder/Technical Lead GeoSolutions

Re: [Geoserver-devel] GSIP 153 - opaque container layer group mode

+1, but I'd like to hear the others as well. Regards, Simone Giannecchini == GeoServer Professional Services from the experts! Visit http://goo.gl/it488V for more information. == Ing. Simone Giannecchini @simogeo Founder/Director GeoSolutions S.A.S. Via di Montramito 3/A 55054 Massarosa (LU)

Re: [Geoserver-devel] GSIP 153 - opaque container layer group mode

Ah hem... anyone? :-) Cheers Andrea On Mon, Dec 19, 2016 at 11:47 AM, Andrea Aime wrote: > Hi, > I've follow up with the previous discussion on layer tree modes and wrote > this proposal: > > https://github.com/geoserver/geoserver/wiki/GSIP-153 > > As suggested by

[Geoserver-devel] GSIP 153 - opaque container layer group mode

Hi, I've follow up with the previous discussion on layer tree modes and wrote this proposal: https://github.com/geoserver/geoserver/wiki/GSIP-153 As suggested by Ben I've summarized the existing group behavior for current layer groups, in protected and non protected mode. Please vote/discuss