Hi Mifan, I guess we should organise an IRC meeting in which we can discuss your proposals. If this is taken through emails from the begin, I am afraid that it will get to some bulk of endless emails. I would kick this off on IRC and then tweak via emails. What do you think? Can you propose a day/time for an IRC meeting?
ciao, Andrea On Sat, Jun 4, 2011 at 9:15 PM, Mifan Careem <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi All, > I am in the process of attempting to figure out the best possible > combinations to use for Catalog View Browse project. As you might be aware > of, the idea is to use best practices from Eclipse and the Java Browsing > Perspective to provide a better view experience to the user [1]. > The current catalog view shows all the layers loaded which can be quite hard > to browse when the number of layers increase. I'd love to hear your thoughts > on the following grouping ideas for a better catalog view. This is available > on wiki with screens at [2] > Version 1: > Projects -> Data Sources/Type/Service -> Layers > Projects would contain the list of projects loaded in the workspace > Data Sources would contain the different data sources (ArcSDE, Files, > Mapserver) under the project > Layers would list the layers under the project's particular Data Source > (An image is available in [2] named Version 1, under the June 10 Weekly > Report) > Version 2: > Projects -> Data Sources/Type/Service -> Categories -> Layers > Projects would contain the list of projects loaded in the workspace > Data Sources would contain the different data sources (ArcSDE, Files, > Mapserver) under the project > Category would be a logical grouping of the layers, maybe based on an > ontology or some standards > Layers would list the layers under the project's particular Data Source and > categorization > (An image is available in [2] named Version 2, under the June 10 Weekly > Report) > Version 3: > Services -> Layer -> Type > This is from Judy's original proposal. > Services would be a list of services that are loaded > Layers would be the layers > Types would be the types of layers > (An image is available in [2] named Version 3, under the June 10 Weekly > Report) > I'd assume that the combinations can be perspectives with individual views? > I'd like to see what the community thinks of the above - please suggest any > new groupings as well that I might have left out. > [1] http://udig.refractions.net/confluence/display/UDIG/GSoC+2011+-+Catalog+Browse+View > [2] http://udig.refractions.net/confluence/display/UDIG/GSoC+2011+-+Catalog+View+Reports > Cheers > Mifan Careem > _______________________________________________ > User-friendly Desktop Internet GIS (uDig) > http://udig.refractions.net > http://lists.refractions.net/mailman/listinfo/udig-devel > > _______________________________________________ User-friendly Desktop Internet GIS (uDig) http://udig.refractions.net http://lists.refractions.net/mailman/listinfo/udig-devel
