Andreas Neumann wrote > Sounds good to me. > > I'd also like to see enhancements on groups in the future. Groups can > be potentially more intelligent if they can hold properties. F.e. some > web services (like WMS) require metadata on groups (like title, > abstracts, responsible entities). One could also think about group > opacity - a useful concept from the SVG world - s
+1. We also need improvement for legend groups in python API. BTW, if we go in the direction of having groups with properties, we are one step closer to data blocks present in Arcgis. A data block is linked to a composer map, and has a lot of properties (size, frames, geographical grids, scr, extent, clip & mask... ). This could lead us to an elegant way of handling multimap composers, and maybe also to be able to switch main mapcanvas into paper units, with a frame indicating paper pages.. Really userfull when dealing with text annotations that need to be calibrated for paper and not screen. Régis Is that a long term target for you? Should we try to plan it for 3.0? -- View this message in context: http://osgeo-org.1560.n6.nabble.com/Legend-group-API-tp5022115p5022238.html Sent from the Quantum GIS - Developer mailing list archive at Nabble.com. _______________________________________________ Qgis-developer mailing list [email protected] http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
