Hi Marc,

okay, I see your point now.

Feel free to open up a ticket for making the layer order in QUERY_LAYERS the 
same as for LAYERS for the WMSGetFeatureInfo control.

TIA.

Best regards,
Bart

-- 
Looking for flexible support on OpenLayers or GeoExt? Please check out 
http://www.osgis.nl/support.html

Bart van den Eijnden
OSGIS
bart...@osgis.nl

On Apr 8, 2011, at 12:46 PM, Marc Jansen wrote:

> Hi Bart,
> 
> I am currently looking at application code that registers an eventlistener to 
> getfetureinfo on the WMSGetFeatureInfoControl.
> 
> In that handler all results except for the first a thrown away. UMN Mapserver 
> in that particular case returns the results for the particular location in 
> the order they were requested.
> 
> The current logic in WMSGetFeatureInfo orders the layers for GetMap in a 
> different Way than for GetFeatureInfo. For UMN this results in a setup where 
> one only sees a feature from layer B (it is drawn atop a feature at the same 
> location from layer A) and the first result of the GFI is the feature from 
> layer A.
> 
> I am totally unsure what (if any) sorting is being applied to results of 
> getFeatureInfo-results by the various WMS-implementations or what the 
> standard says.
> 
> At least for UMN the order seems to be relevant.
> 
> I know that the application code could be refactored to examine the results 
> and find the correct one, but I also see UMN mapserver behaving as one might 
> (!) expect it to do:
> 
> Draw layer B atop of A => REQUEST=GetMap&LAYERS=A,B
> Query Layer for Feature Info => REQUEST=GetFeatureInfo&QUERY_LAYERS=B,A
> 
> I am just unsure what the correct behaviour is, and if we should ignore the 
> fact that UMN does respect the order of QUERY_LAYERS.
> 
> I hope my point is somehow clear and not to insignificant (Maybe I should not 
> be working on this after a week of conference-stress ;-)).
> 
> Regards,
> Marc
> 
> 
> 
> On 08.04.2011 10:30, Bart van den Eijnden wrote:
>> Hi Marc,
>> 
>> I did not see how the confusing behaviour could be reached, since 
>> FEATURE_COUNT is on a *per layer* basis AFAIK.
>> 
>> So if there are features in both layers on the clicked point and 
>> FEATURE_COUNT is 1, you will always get back 2 features.
>> 
>> Or am I missing something here?
>> 
>> Best regards,
>> Bart
>> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Dev mailing list
> d...@lists.osgeo.org
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/openlayers-dev
> 

_______________________________________________
Dev mailing list
d...@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/openlayers-dev

Reply via email to