On 18 June 2010 16:53, <christopher.schm...@nokia.com> wrote: > I regularly use a WMS server with no 'layers' param. I know that this > is a special case, but the layer does not technically require this > parameter to work. (Your server might; the spec might even, but > the parameters that are required depend on your server.)
a situation I've often found with WMS servers is that the (WMS) params depend on the state of the map; having the layers param dependent on zoomlevel is a common issue. In some cases, I'm even using different servers depending on the zoomlevel. In this case, you can't specify the WMS params in the constructor, but only in a custom moveTo or whatever. So to me the key point is not whether a particular property is necessary for a particular method in the object to function, but whether it has to be present in the constructor. I would guess that the number of truly required params (i.e. the object can't be constructed without it) is very small. To me, the big advantage of OL (and JS) is it's very flexible, and allows me to change more or less any property or method whenever necessary. Requiring me to enter something in the constructor param (WMS params in the case above) even if I don't know at that point what it should be seems like unnecessary bureaucracy to me, and IMO it would be better simply to document what happens if certain params are or are not present. Anyway, that fits in better with the name 'options' - by definition, all options are optional :-) FWIW, I favour the single object argument, though it's not something I would man the barricades about. _______________________________________________ Dev mailing list Dev@openlayers.org http://openlayers.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
