WFS Layer, Vector Merge

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
3 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

WFS Layer, Vector Merge

Christopher Schmidt-2
This is my final email for the night (and probably for a couple days on
OL: I'm only writing this today because illness has kept me up all night
after sleeping all day.)

== WFS Layer ==

Renaming the WFS layer is no longer neccesary.

As Schuyler pointed out (rightly), we had decided that a featureClass
determines how the feature is rendered. In the case of Vectors, we can't
change the features the parser gets back (at the moment), but we can
just use that as a fallback. If the default Feature Class was being
used, then the layer will be a vector layer -- if there is no
featureClass on the layer, that is our fallback state. If there is a
featureClass, the old markers-style layer is used instead. This
maintains API compatibility.

There have been a couple other changes to the WFS layer: it got a lot of
love it really deserved. It's now a single untiled layer (instead of
being tiled, which only kind of works for points). If you want more
points, you should up the points served by your WFS server.

API hasn't changed at all. The old Owls WFS demo works again, just as it
did before, displaying markers for points from the layer.

== Vector Merge ==

I think this was the last blocker for the vector merge. The
MouseDefaults and MouseToolbar changes have happened, the renderers all
work, and the WFS layer has been restored. Before release, we need to
make sure there is more complete test coverage, and do more testing with
single file builds, as well as creating a couple of updated build
profiles to let people get back to the equivilant OpenLayers to the
pre-vector branch if they choose to. Because the additions to the core
code are minor -- tiny, even -- the vector branch should be a relatively
low impact merge. I think my previous email, which pointed out that only
5 existing classes have had any modifications at all, is ample to prove
this :)

I've kept the branch up to date with trunk as best as possible.
Hopefully this will lead to a smooth merge process.

If you have concerns about the merging of the vector branch back to
trunk, please voice them now. We've added a lot of code, but I believe
we've done it in such a way as to be unobtrusive. If you want more
information about what exactly has changed, you can take a look at the
complete patch to changes in Javascript functionality:

http://trac.openlayers.org/attachment/ticket/46/vector.patch

This is an svn diff against everything in lib/ on trunk vs. vector-2.4.

Please express opinions, positive or negative.

Regards,
--
Christopher Schmidt
MetaCarta
_______________________________________________
Dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://openlayers.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: WFS Layer, Vector Merge

Erik Uzureau-3
Three cheers for the extraordinary effort of Mr. Schmidt, who, in the midst
of mild hallucinatory fever, has continued resiliently pounding away at this
vector branch. Lots of people have put lots of time into getting this code
ready for the merge, but for real, hats off to chris for taking the
initiative to
do this diff... and all the other million motivational/administrational things
he's done to make vectors in OL a reality.

We're almost there!!!

-e

On 3/14/07, Christopher Schmidt <[hidden email]> wrote:

> This is my final email for the night (and probably for a couple days on
> OL: I'm only writing this today because illness has kept me up all night
> after sleeping all day.)
>
> == WFS Layer ==
>
> Renaming the WFS layer is no longer neccesary.
>
> As Schuyler pointed out (rightly), we had decided that a featureClass
> determines how the feature is rendered. In the case of Vectors, we can't
> change the features the parser gets back (at the moment), but we can
> just use that as a fallback. If the default Feature Class was being
> used, then the layer will be a vector layer -- if there is no
> featureClass on the layer, that is our fallback state. If there is a
> featureClass, the old markers-style layer is used instead. This
> maintains API compatibility.
>
> There have been a couple other changes to the WFS layer: it got a lot of
> love it really deserved. It's now a single untiled layer (instead of
> being tiled, which only kind of works for points). If you want more
> points, you should up the points served by your WFS server.
>
> API hasn't changed at all. The old Owls WFS demo works again, just as it
> did before, displaying markers for points from the layer.
>
> == Vector Merge ==
>
> I think this was the last blocker for the vector merge. The
> MouseDefaults and MouseToolbar changes have happened, the renderers all
> work, and the WFS layer has been restored. Before release, we need to
> make sure there is more complete test coverage, and do more testing with
> single file builds, as well as creating a couple of updated build
> profiles to let people get back to the equivilant OpenLayers to the
> pre-vector branch if they choose to. Because the additions to the core
> code are minor -- tiny, even -- the vector branch should be a relatively
> low impact merge. I think my previous email, which pointed out that only
> 5 existing classes have had any modifications at all, is ample to prove
> this :)
>
> I've kept the branch up to date with trunk as best as possible.
> Hopefully this will lead to a smooth merge process.
>
> If you have concerns about the merging of the vector branch back to
> trunk, please voice them now. We've added a lot of code, but I believe
> we've done it in such a way as to be unobtrusive. If you want more
> information about what exactly has changed, you can take a look at the
> complete patch to changes in Javascript functionality:
>
> http://trac.openlayers.org/attachment/ticket/46/vector.patch
>
> This is an svn diff against everything in lib/ on trunk vs. vector-2.4.
>
> Please express opinions, positive or negative.
>
> Regards,
> --
> Christopher Schmidt
> MetaCarta
> _______________________________________________
> Dev mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://openlayers.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
>
_______________________________________________
Dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://openlayers.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: WFS Layer, Vector Merge

John Cole X
In reply to this post by Christopher Schmidt-2
Hurrah! Hurrah! Hurrah!

:-)

I'm really exited about the new changes.  OL is a really impressive system,
and having written my own I know how much effort this endeavor has taken.

Thanks to the whole team.

John

-----Original Message-----
From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] On
Behalf Of Erik Uzureau
Sent: Thursday, March 15, 2007 12:55 AM
To: Christopher Schmidt
Cc: [hidden email]
Subject: Re: [OpenLayers-Dev] WFS Layer, Vector Merge

Three cheers for the extraordinary effort of Mr. Schmidt, who, in the midst
of mild hallucinatory fever, has continued resiliently pounding away at this
vector branch. Lots of people have put lots of time into getting this code
ready for the merge, but for real, hats off to chris for taking the
initiative to
do this diff... and all the other million motivational/administrational
things
he's done to make vectors in OL a reality.

We're almost there!!!

-e

On 3/14/07, Christopher Schmidt <[hidden email]> wrote:

> This is my final email for the night (and probably for a couple days on
> OL: I'm only writing this today because illness has kept me up all night
> after sleeping all day.)
>
> == WFS Layer ==
>
> Renaming the WFS layer is no longer neccesary.
>
> As Schuyler pointed out (rightly), we had decided that a featureClass
> determines how the feature is rendered. In the case of Vectors, we can't
> change the features the parser gets back (at the moment), but we can
> just use that as a fallback. If the default Feature Class was being
> used, then the layer will be a vector layer -- if there is no
> featureClass on the layer, that is our fallback state. If there is a
> featureClass, the old markers-style layer is used instead. This
> maintains API compatibility.
>
> There have been a couple other changes to the WFS layer: it got a lot of
> love it really deserved. It's now a single untiled layer (instead of
> being tiled, which only kind of works for points). If you want more
> points, you should up the points served by your WFS server.
>
> API hasn't changed at all. The old Owls WFS demo works again, just as it
> did before, displaying markers for points from the layer.
>
> == Vector Merge ==
>
> I think this was the last blocker for the vector merge. The
> MouseDefaults and MouseToolbar changes have happened, the renderers all
> work, and the WFS layer has been restored. Before release, we need to
> make sure there is more complete test coverage, and do more testing with
> single file builds, as well as creating a couple of updated build
> profiles to let people get back to the equivilant OpenLayers to the
> pre-vector branch if they choose to. Because the additions to the core
> code are minor -- tiny, even -- the vector branch should be a relatively
> low impact merge. I think my previous email, which pointed out that only
> 5 existing classes have had any modifications at all, is ample to prove
> this :)
>
> I've kept the branch up to date with trunk as best as possible.
> Hopefully this will lead to a smooth merge process.
>
> If you have concerns about the merging of the vector branch back to
> trunk, please voice them now. We've added a lot of code, but I believe
> we've done it in such a way as to be unobtrusive. If you want more
> information about what exactly has changed, you can take a look at the
> complete patch to changes in Javascript functionality:
>
> http://trac.openlayers.org/attachment/ticket/46/vector.patch
>
> This is an svn diff against everything in lib/ on trunk vs. vector-2.4.
>
> Please express opinions, positive or negative.
>
> Regards,
> --
> Christopher Schmidt
> MetaCarta
> _______________________________________________
> Dev mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://openlayers.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
>
_______________________________________________
Dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://openlayers.org/mailman/listinfo/dev

--
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.446 / Virus Database: 268.18.11/721 - Release Date: 3/13/2007
4:51 PM
 

--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.446 / Virus Database: 268.18.11/722 - Release Date: 3/14/2007
3:38 PM
 
This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the sender. This message contains confidential information and is intended only for the individual named. If you are not the named addressee you should not disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail.
_______________________________________________
Dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://openlayers.org/mailman/listinfo/dev