Not sure. Way back when I only recall discussion taking place about what the parameters would be named when going through the reflector, not what the format options should be named.
I agree it would be better to have the parameters be named the same, i can't think of any reason not to. Unfortunately we are stuck with those format options for backwards compatability reason but it should be easy to deprecate them and make them aliases for the new consistent names. -Justin On 3/12/10 6:23 AM, Andrea Aime wrote: > Hi, > I'm the only one finding the inconsistency between the > names of the params used int reflector and GetMap format_options > confusing? > > The reflector will use mode=superoverlay whilst > the GetMap path uses format_options=superoverlay:true. > > The same goes for superoverlay_mode (reflector) vs overlaymode > (format options). > > Why is that? Can't we have the use use the same names and > the same way to express things? > > Cheers > Andrea > -- Justin Deoliveira OpenGeo - http://opengeo.org Enterprise support for open source geospatial. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Download Intel® Parallel Studio Eval Try the new software tools for yourself. Speed compiling, find bugs proactively, and fine-tune applications for parallel performance. See why Intel Parallel Studio got high marks during beta. http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-sw-dev _______________________________________________ Geoserver-devel mailing list Geoserver-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geoserver-devel
