Sounds like a reasonable approach to me. What will the option look like 
to the user? Will it be a vendor parameter in an SLD? Or what did you 
have in mind?

Andrea Aime wrote:
> Hi all,
> I'm writing to build some consensus on how to handle a
> compatibility breaking change.
> 
> Years ago, way before my involvement in GeoServer, I
> introduced a rendering optimization for lines. The
> observation was that if the line width was less than
> 1.5 pixels, setting it to 0 flat would make the rendering
> quite a bit faster (30%+ if my memory serves me right)
> and the visual result would have been the same.
> 
> Now, at the time I was not using antialiasing, as it
> made rendering times untolerable on my Athlon 700Mhz,
> and I did not notice how that optimization affected
> antialiased rendering.
> 
> These days more than one people complains that they
> cannot control the thickness of thin lines. No wonder,
> it's the above optimization kicking in.
> And with antialiasing rendering on, well, you can
> tell a difference between line withs of 0.5, 1,
> and 1.5 pixels (just to make an example).
> 
> So, what can we do? Kicking off the optimization
> the hard way does not seem like a good option to me.
> People have been creating styles based on the current
> behaviour, changing it would change the way maps
> are rendered.
> To give you some examples, here are maps that
> have been rendered with the optimization on (the
> current behaviour) and off (the proposed change).
> 
> USA population:
> default: http://www.flickr.com/photos/29313...@n03/3217765574/sizes/o/
> opt off: http://www.flickr.com/photos/29313...@n03/3217765474/sizes/o/
> 
> USA population, with hatch fills:
> default: http://www.flickr.com/photos/29313...@n03/3216912511/sizes/o/
> opt off: http://www.flickr.com/photos/29313...@n03/3216912387/sizes/o/
> 
> Tasmania:
> default: http://www.flickr.com/photos/29313...@n03/3217765504/sizes/o/
> opt off: http://www.flickr.com/photos/29313...@n03/3216912443/sizes/o/
> 
> As you can see the rendering changes, in some cases, significantly.
> It's still possible to get back the old "thin line" rendering, you
> just have to go and specify a thinner line with, such as 0.5, in the
> SLD.
> 
> What I'm proposing is to create an option that allows to toggle
> the optimization on and off at the renderer level, and at the
> SLDStyleFactory level (since this is where the optimization
> really kicks in). For the 2.5.x series, we leave
> the option on by default, so no change in rendering occurs
> unless you tell the code otherwise.
> 
> For the trunk series, I'd say that we should turn the
> optimization off by default, but leave the toggle around for
> one more release cycle, after which, we remove it completely.
> 
> How does this sound?
> Cheers
> Andrea
> 


-- 
Justin Deoliveira
OpenGeo - http://opengeo.org
Enterprise support for open source geospatial.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by:
SourcForge Community
SourceForge wants to tell your story.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/sf-spreadtheword
_______________________________________________
Geotools-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geotools-devel

Reply via email to