On Nov 15, 2007 5:51 PM, Tim Schaub <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hey- > > I'm a bit behind here, but I'll throw in my opinion. > > I don't want to support Geometry.Rectangle. I think it was an accident > to let it in the trunk, and I hope it goes away. > > I'm very much in favor of adding properties to a polygon like "regular" > (boolean) and "sides" (integer). > > This way, controls could (optionally) respect these properties of a > polygon - allowing for editing that would maintain the geometry "class." > > A rectangle is a four sided irregular polygon. A circle is a many > (maybe 30, who knows) sided regular polygon. Turning a circle into an > ellipse is as easy as modifying while respecting the number of sides and > ignoring the "regular" property. As mentioned before, no need to create > new classes when we can modify behavior with a few properties on an > existing class.
Thanks for your response Tim. I think we agree on the way to proceed. I really like the addition of "regular" and "sides" to cover every case. I've started working on an implementation of all this, starting from your irregular regular polygons work (<http://trac.openlayers.org/ticket/1098>) and pvalsecc's ModifyFeature patch. The idea is to be able to modify regular polygons and polygons with fixed number of sides without removing these constrains. My code doesn't work for polygons with fixed number of sides yet. See <http://dev.openlayers.org/sandbox/elemoine/regular-polygon/examples/modify-feature.html>. Note that I added an APIProperty to ModifyFeature to make it respect constrains (if any). So the old behavior can still be achieved. -- Eric _______________________________________________ Dev mailing list [email protected] http://openlayers.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
