On Mon, Mar 03, 2008 at 01:29:54PM -0700, Tim Schaub wrote: > >> I'm curious about your use case. I don't have a good idea how common it > >> is to want to style a feature in a way that has nothing to do with its > >> attributes. > > > > I'm making a Facebook-API based "friends map" of users hometowns, by > > ... > > since when they stack on top of each other, it's hard to know how many > > are really in a stack. > > Sounds cool. I would guess that you'll not be adding much meaning to > the map if you symbolize a pile of markers with random colors. I think > grouping and using marker size to represent multiple markers is more > intuitive. In the end, I bet more people can make sense of markers if > they are symbolized by something meaningful about the feature they > represent. This has nothing to do with GIS, just common sense.
Sure, but I wanted something I could implement. Since I don't have the knowledge to implement grouping, it isn't covered here. > > I don't see a useful way to make this work as an attribute filter. A > > FeatureID filter would be fine, but I'm not sure I understand the > > benefit of a FeatureID based filter over usig a symbolizer directly, so > > long as I want a fixed selection style (not based on FID). Perhaps > > there's some aspect of this I'm not understanding. > > You're right, if you want each feature to have a symbolizer that you > generate at construction, you can tack that symbolizer on to the > features themselves. And if you want all features to look the same when > selected (regardless of what they looked like before they were > selected), then you have no use for anything more than a selectedStyle > attribute on the select feature control. Great. That's all I needed: apparently I just screwed something up while testing it. Thanks for the confirmation. Regards, -- Christopher Schmidt MetaCarta _______________________________________________ Dev mailing list [email protected] http://openlayers.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
