It's also significantly faster to push features into the layer and
draw all in one go.
cheers,
Sean
On Jan 26, 2006, at 7:48 AM, Steve Lime wrote:
The addfeature method is a bit more robust since you're assured the =
dynamic points will be treated exactly like any other layer. With
the =
shape/point draw method there are a few issues (like the one you
found) to =
work around (and document).
Steve
Mark Brooks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 01/25/06 10:49 PM >>>
Steve,
Thanks for the reply. Good idea on option 1; I'll give that a try.=20
Regarding your comment on using the add feature capability... is it=20
better practice to addfeature for a dynamic point as opposed to just =
draw()?
Thanks again,
Mark
Steve Lime wrote:
I believe the decision to annotate is computed at a layer level so =
scales are not checked when you draw at the feature level. I'll
have to =
check the code to be sure about this. There are a couple of options:
=20
1 - compare the scale values in your code and not send a label
string =
if your about the scale
=20
2 - use the layer add feature capability to add all the points
to the =
layer and then draw the whole layer
=20
Option 1 is probably the easiest.
=20
Steve
=20
=20
=20
=20
=20
Mark Brooks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 01/25/06 9:03 PM >>>
=20
I've got a layer that I draw dynamically. I query a database,
loop=20
through the results, create a ms_newPointObj(), setxy() on that
new=20
point, then draw that point on the map. Works great. In my
mapfile, =
I=20
have LABELMAXSCALE set for the dynamic layer. However, it has no =
effect=20
whatsoever on the labeling for the dynamic layer. The labels are =
always=20
shown regardless of the scale. The same method works fine with =
static=20
shape files, just not my dynamic layer. Any suggestions?
