Excellent point. >>> Sean Gillies <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 01/26/06 9:03 AM >>> 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?
