Hey- Oh, and one more thing...
Eric Lemoine wrote: > Thanks for putting this patch together Tim. > > Initially Chris wanted that the bbox strategy behave aggressively on > zoom in, but, as an optimization, only if the number of features in > the layer is not lower than the maxfeatures value set in the protocol. > > The change you're proposing wouldn't allow this. The change I proposed > involved adding a new Integer option to the bbox strategy. If that > option is null the strategy behaves as currently. If it's non-null > then it behaves aggressively if the number of features in the layer is > not lower than the option value. > > Chris was concerned with configuration data duplication - maxfeatures > is kinda set in the protocol as well as in the strategy; which doesn't > bother me actually. > > You may concerned with the fact that my proposed option targets a > specific case (maxfeatures-parameterized requests) and doesn't address > other, maybe more common, cases. I actually don't see other cases when > a more aggressive mode makes sense, but that's probably just me. > Other use cases: I have a service that returns the top ten pizza joints in any bounding box. You don't get to ask for the top 11. A nice service would be one that returned different level of detail depending on the extent of the request. You ask for the world, I give you a simplified road network. You ask for your neighborhood, I give you a bit more detail. Obviously, you'd want to be able to have control over what you ask for - but some clients (say Google Earth) don't let you tweak request parameters (aside from bbox) as you navigate around. Tim PS - I don't really have a pizza service. But flickr searches take a bbox and impose a limit on the number of items returned. And feeds from big search services typically limit the number of results they return. > Cheers, > > Eric > > 2008/11/13, Tim Schaub <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: >> Hey- >> >> Christopher Schmidt wrote: >>> I'm still lost as to how to go about coding what I want :) I want to >>> have maxfeatures, and more aggressive invalidation because of it. Any >>> suggestinos as to how I might go about implementing that, or should I >>> just toss together something and people will look at afterwards? >>> >> If you haven't already tossed something together, see the patch for >> http://trac.openlayers.org/ticket/1830. >> >> Set resFactor to 1 if you want to request features with every change in >> resolution. >> >> Tim >> >>> Regards, >> >> -- >> Tim Schaub >> OpenGeo - http://opengeo.org >> Expert service straight from the developers. >> _______________________________________________ >> Dev mailing list >> Dev@openlayers.org >> http://openlayers.org/mailman/listinfo/dev >> -- Tim Schaub OpenGeo - http://opengeo.org Expert service straight from the developers. _______________________________________________ Dev mailing list Dev@openlayers.org http://openlayers.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
