Yes, if you consider trial and error a mindful method, I "use" label placement algorithms when preparing a cartographic layout for printing. I mainly work on geographic data and web output, so it's not frequent and I follow the easy and dumb way: I swap algorithms, hoping for a result that solves cluttering in the worst spots, until it fits – usually it fits here and it's out of order elsewhere... I generally criticise this approach, but when looking for a good appearance, it seems bearable. Yes, I would need some more information to do a better work. As already said, I think this is a cartographic issue that can get more benefits by a better GIS approach. Label positioning is not "substantial" but can exploit proper data. Say population for a populated place. Using these algorithms on top of geometric-only data gives little more than casual results. I had the opportunity to weight the theory behind these methods starting from the obituary of Mitchell Jay Feigenbaum by Maurizio Codogno on ilPost.it that referenced the New York Times: https://www.nytimes.com/2019/07/18/science/mitchell-feigenbaum-dead.html. Looking to further developments, I think there is not a "best" algorithm, but that it's useful to keep alternatives. I doubt the algorithms could really work well without an interface that can reach useful data, but I also think that keeping them available without any special interface could keep them in a place that is not really influenced by the frequent enhancements of QGIS. c
On Mon, Jul 29, 2019 at 8:31 AM Nyall Dawson <[email protected]> wrote: > On Mon, 29 Jul 2019 at 16:28, Carlo A. Bertelli (Charta s.r.l.) > <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > Label placement took a lot of time and efforts in the past and this is > the outcome. > > It's true, there is no real need for it while on screen, but it could be > very useful in Layout. The problem is similar to generalisation, you need > proper data to support label placement. Losing the relationship with real > geographic objects, when exporting the layout in SVG or postscript, label > placement takes time and needs cartographic expertise while changing the > algorithm in Layout mode can help a lot. > > So - just to confirm -- you are actively changing that setting, and > seeing useful results from different methods? If so, which do you use? > Which give the best results? What's the trade off between them? > > Nyall > > > > Keeping several algorithms in Layout could ease code maintenance while > keeping all the advantages. > > On the other hand, this needs some efforts on documentation and Anita's > touch is really welcome here. Algorithms need reference but also a plain > explanation in something that resembles a book. Someone developed a > publishing business out of a GIS program... maybe this is too much and has > already been done, but... > > My two eurocents. > > c > > > > On Mon, Jul 29, 2019 at 2:00 AM Nyall Dawson <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> > >> On Fri, 26 Jul 2019 at 12:40, Nyall Dawson <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> > > >> > Hey lists > >> > > >> > This was first discussed back in 2016 (see > >> > > http://osgeo-org.1560.x6.nabble.com/Removal-of-labeling-search-methods-td5262743.html > ), > >> > but would anyone object if the different labeling solution algorithms > >> > eg "chain" / "pop music" / "falp" / etc were dropped, and we just > >> > leave the existing default (chain)? > >> > > >> > I don't think ANYONE knows what these mean, and it's a heck of a lot > >> > of code (which needs fixes) to cart around for no compelling reason > >> > that I can see. > >> > > >> > I have no particular preference to any of the methods, so would > >> > happily accept a different default if anyone out there can point to > >> > which method is best! > >> > > >> > Googling pop music / tabu / chain only gives a handful of results > >> > relating to QGIS labeling engine. And googling for "falp" sounds like > >> > something that would get you flagged on your company's firewall. > >> > > >> > Does ANYONE understand or change this setting? Or would object to its > >> > complete removal? > >> > >> PR at https://github.com/qgis/QGIS/pull/30960 > >> > >> Last chance to save this setting! > >> > >> Nyall > >> _______________________________________________ > >> QGIS-Developer mailing list > >> [email protected] > >> List info: https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer > >> Unsubscribe: https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer > > > > > > > > -- > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Carlo A. Bertelli > > Charta servizi e sistemi per il territorio e la storia ambientale srl > > Dipendenze del palazzo Doria, > > vc. alla Chiesa della Maddalena 9/2 16124 Genova (Italy) > > tel./fax +39(0)10 2475439 +39 0108566195 mobile:+39 393 > 1590711 > > e-mail: [email protected] http://www.chartasrl.eu > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > > > > -- -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Carlo A. Bertelli Charta servizi e sistemi per il territorio e la storia ambientale srl Dipendenze del palazzo Doria, vc. alla Chiesa della Maddalena 9/2 16124 Genova (Italy) tel./fax +39(0)10 2475439 +39 0108566195 mobile:+39 393 1590711 e-mail: [email protected] http://www.chartasrl.eu --------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________ QGIS-Developer mailing list [email protected] List info: https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer Unsubscribe: https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
