Re: [mapserver-users] Mapserver.org sample ...
On Wed, Jan 14, 2009 at 09:21:38AM -0600, Bob Basques wrote: All, The only reason I brought it up at all, was that I was playing around with Openlayers myself this week. I pretty much copied the Demo from the MapServer website. Sounds like that was the wrong to go :c) Absolutely. The demo on the MapServer site is using a layer that is generally not needed in any application -- at least not until you're looking for something that can be deployed without a MapServer 'server' in the mix. Benefits of GeoMoose (Main ones) for the normal user. * Fast (because of MapServer tuning.). Smaller footprint The dem on the MapServer main site seems pretty fast to me. Much faster than any non-cached demo I've seen. Are you saying that GeoMoose has tuned MapServer t such an extent that it is faster to render images than it is to serve pre-rendered tiles that demonstrate MapServer's rendering skills? * Handles many layers with ease. The limit is the client hardware, and the control is given to the user as to how many to display. This is a GeoMoose benefit over other client software, but I don't see how it makes a better demo of MapServer's rendering capabilities. * The publishing of the data can be distributed, down to the layer level, including the contents of the popups. Each layer can be managed separately without consequence to the rest of the interface, if it breaks, only that layer is not available. This is a GeoMoose benefit over other client software, but I don't see how it makes a better demo of MapServer's rendering capabilities. * More interface user Control, layer fading, on/off, stacking order, popup on/off. This is a GeoMoose benefit over other client software, but I don't see how it makes a better demo of MapServer's rendering capabilities. * And it's all a client lib as well, just like Openlayers. Closer than you think. This is a GeoMoose benefit over other client software, but I don't see how it makes a better demo of MapServer's rendering capabilities. * If I had to teach MapServer request strategies, I would use MapServer + GeoMoose + Firebug to do it. GeoMoose uses the CGI functionality for images, imagemaps, and querying. I don't knwo what you mean by this, so I can't comment on it. Not that I'm trying to defend GeoMoose. Just wanted to know how to join in on popularizing MapServer. GeoMoose has many advantages over other client software, if you are demonstrating client software. The MapServer homepage should be a quick, simple, easy to use demonstration of MapServer capabilties -- in this case, a pretty map. I can see an argument that the MapSerer homepage should use a static image instead, but I think that is a less effective demonstration of the pretty rendering. I do not think that changing from OpenLayers givves a better demonstration of *MapServer*'s rendering capabilties, and I can't imagine a more effective demo could be created against static content. Also, I think our definitions of RESTful are slightly different. I would say that GeoMoose is very (VERY) ReSTfully designed. ReST is Restructured Text, the format used by the MapServer documentation. Regards, -- Christopher Schmidt MetaCarta ___ mapserver-users mailing list mapserver-users@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/mapserver-users
RE: [mapserver-users] Mapserver.org sample ...
Also, I think our definitions of RESTful are slightly different. I would say that GeoMoose is very (VERY) ReSTfully designed. ... I hear the distant sound of someone spitting their organic coffee all over a computer monitor in Ft. Collins, CO ; / ___ mapserver-users mailing list mapserver-users@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/mapserver-users
Re: [mapserver-users] Mapserver.org sample ...
Chris, The biggest piece I see GeoMoose contributing to, is the CGI calling methods. GeoMoose makes extensive use of the ImageMap building and Query Mechanisms available with MapServer, not just the image rendering. Although the stacking of the images inside of the GeoMoose interface is and has been a novel way of presenting the MapServer contructs (IMO). OpenLayers does this as well to some degree, but I believe the GeoMoose interface provides a greater degree of end user control. I'm interested in promoting more than just MapServer image rendering. Using Mapserver's CGI capabilities with a Client LIB is pretty much the way I've used MapServer since starting up with it over ten years ago. The imagemap (templating) and Query capabilities are just as important as the image rendering. The teaching reference below, was aimed squarely at the idea of using MapServer via it's CGI calling structure, which I've always thought should be demo-ified in some location. But since MapServer (and it's community) hasn't in the past had any particular interest in ratifying a client for use, I never pursued the idea. But now, with that nice OpenLayers window on the MapServer page, the sky's the limit so to speak, as far as setting up demos and including them in the MapServer site, or at least it seems like it should be. :c) bobb Christopher Schmidt crschm...@metacarta.com 01/14/09 10:37 AM On Wed, Jan 14, 2009 at 09:21:38AM -0600, Bob Basques wrote: All, The only reason I brought it up at all, was that I was playing around with Openlayers myself this week. I pretty much copied the Demo from the MapServer website. Sounds like that was the wrong to go :c) Absolutely. The demo on the MapServer site is using a layer that is generally not needed in any application -- at least not until you're looking for something that can be deployed without a MapServer 'server' in the mix. Benefits of GeoMoose (Main ones) for the normal user. * Fast (because of MapServer tuning.). Smaller footprint The dem on the MapServer main site seems pretty fast to me. Much faster than any non-cached demo I've seen. Are you saying that GeoMoose has tuned MapServer t such an extent that it is faster to render images than it is to serve pre-rendered tiles that demonstrate MapServer's rendering skills? * Handles many layers with ease. The limit is the client hardware, and the control is given to the user as to how many to display. This is a GeoMoose benefit over other client software, but I don't see how it makes a better demo of MapServer's rendering capabilities. * The publishing of the data can be distributed, down to the layer level, including the contents of the popups. Each layer can be managed separately without consequence to the rest of the interface, if it breaks, only that layer is not available. This is a GeoMoose benefit over other client software, but I don't see how it makes a better demo of MapServer's rendering capabilities. * More interface user Control, layer fading, on/off, stacking order, popup on/off. This is a GeoMoose benefit over other client software, but I don't see how it makes a better demo of MapServer's rendering capabilities. * And it's all a client lib as well, just like Openlayers. Closer than you think. This is a GeoMoose benefit over other client software, but I don't see how it makes a better demo of MapServer's rendering capabilities. * If I had to teach MapServer request strategies, I would use MapServer + GeoMoose + Firebug to do it. GeoMoose uses the CGI functionality for images, imagemaps, and querying. I don't knwo what you mean by this, so I can't comment on it. Not that I'm trying to defend GeoMoose. Just wanted to know how to join in on popularizing MapServer. GeoMoose has many advantages over other client software, if you are demonstrating client software. The MapServer homepage should be a quick, simple, easy to use demonstration of MapServer capabilties -- in this case, a pretty map. I can see an argument that the MapSerer homepage should use a static image instead, but I think that is a less effective demonstration of the pretty rendering. I do not think that changing from OpenLayers givves a better demonstration of *MapServer*'s rendering capabilties, and I can't imagine a more effective demo could be created against static content. Also, I think our definitions of RESTful are slightly different. I would say that GeoMoose is very (VERY) ReSTfully designed. ReST is Restructured Text, the format used by the MapServer documentation. Regards, -- Christopher Schmidt MetaCarta ___ mapserver-users mailing list mapserver-users@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/mapserver-users
Re: [mapserver-users] Mapserver.org sample ...
personally don't prefer openlayers except for its drag feature.
openlayers appears tied to py. map rendered using layer = new
OpenLayers.Layer.MapServer( map, /cgi-bin/mapserv.exe, {map:
'/openlayers.map'} ); is sometimes jagged at outer zoom (with fewer
dpi). may just need to tune but i agree mapserver.org could feature
many maps - openlayers, geomoose. my 2 cents.
thks, jzs
On Wed, Jan 14, 2009 at 12:13 PM, Bob Basques
bob.basq...@ci.stpaul.mn.us wrote:
Chris,
The biggest piece I see GeoMoose contributing to, is the CGI
calling methods. GeoMoose makes extensive use of the ImageMap
building and Query Mechanisms available with MapServer, not just the
image rendering. Although the stacking of the images inside of the
GeoMoose interface is and has been a novel way of presenting the
MapServer contructs (IMO). OpenLayers does this as well to some
degree, but I believe the GeoMoose interface provides a greater degree
of end user control.
I'm interested in promoting more than just MapServer image
rendering. Using Mapserver's CGI capabilities with a Client LIB is
pretty much the way I've used MapServer since starting up with it over
ten years ago. The imagemap (templating) and Query capabilities are
just as important as the image rendering. The teaching reference
below, was aimed squarely at the idea of using MapServer via it's CGI
calling structure, which I've always thought should be demo-ified in
some location. But since MapServer (and it's community) hasn't in the
past had any particular interest in ratifying a client for use, I
never pursued the idea. But now, with that nice OpenLayers window on
the MapServer page, the sky's the limit so to speak, as far as setting
up demos and including them in the MapServer site, or at least it
seems like it should be.
:c)
bobb
Christopher Schmidt crschm...@metacarta.com 01/14/09 10:37 AM
On Wed, Jan 14, 2009 at 09:21:38AM -0600, Bob Basques wrote:
All,
The only reason I brought it up at all, was that I was playing around
with Openlayers myself this week.
I pretty much copied the Demo from the MapServer website. Sounds like
that was the wrong to go :c)
Absolutely. The demo on the MapServer site is using a layer that is
generally not needed in any application -- at least not until you're
looking for something that can be deployed without a MapServer 'server'
in the mix.
Benefits of GeoMoose (Main ones) for the normal user.
* Fast (because of MapServer tuning.). Smaller footprint
The dem on the MapServer main site seems pretty fast to me. Much faster
than any non-cached demo I've seen. Are you saying that GeoMoose has
tuned MapServer t such an extent that it is faster to render images than
it is to serve pre-rendered tiles that demonstrate MapServer's rendering
skills?
* Handles many layers with ease. The limit is the client hardware,
and the control is given to the user as to how many to display.
This is a GeoMoose benefit over other client software, but I don't see
how it makes a better demo of MapServer's rendering capabilities.
* The publishing of the data can be distributed, down to the layer
level, including the contents of the popups. Each layer can be
managed separately without consequence to the rest of the
interface, if it breaks, only that layer is not available.
This is a GeoMoose benefit over other client software, but I don't see
how it makes a better demo of MapServer's rendering capabilities.
* More interface user Control, layer fading, on/off, stacking order,
popup on/off.
This is a GeoMoose benefit over other client software, but I don't see
how it makes a better demo of MapServer's rendering capabilities.
* And it's all a client lib as well, just like Openlayers. Closer
than you think.
This is a GeoMoose benefit over other client software, but I don't see
how it makes a better demo of MapServer's rendering capabilities.
* If I had to teach MapServer request strategies, I would use
MapServer + GeoMoose + Firebug to do it. GeoMoose uses the CGI
functionality for images, imagemaps, and querying.
I don't knwo what you mean by this, so I can't comment on it.
Not that I'm trying to defend GeoMoose. Just wanted to know how to join
in on popularizing MapServer.
GeoMoose has many advantages over other client software, if you are
demonstrating client software. The MapServer homepage should be a quick,
simple, easy to use demonstration of MapServer capabilties -- in this
case, a pretty map. I can see an argument that the MapSerer homepage
should use a static image instead, but I think that is a less effective
demonstration of the pretty rendering. I do not think that changing from
OpenLayers givves a better demonstration
Re: [mapserver-users] Mapserver.org sample ...
Bob Chris, OpenLayers and GeoMOOSE are entirely non-competitive projects. The OL is a library on which to build mapping interfaces such as GeoMOOSE. Which is why we're using it for GeoMOOSE 2... it gets rid of a lot of the tedium of maintaining code for the more basic aspects of the application (like Zooming, Drawing, etc.). The real advantage to GeoMOOSE is the service model, and the litany of services we try to make easy to configure for users. Out of the box GeoMOOSE is high customizable but also highly useful. The goal is to provide an interface to mapserver that works WITHOUT any coding. I want people to know ZERO javascript, php, or python, and still be able to use the web-mapping client. - Original Message From: Bob Basques bob.basq...@ci.stpaul.mn.us To: bo...@gritechnologies.com; crschm...@metacarta.com Cc: mapserver-users@lists.osgeo.org Sent: Wednesday, January 14, 2009 11:13:24 AM Subject: Re: [mapserver-users] Mapserver.org sample ... Chris, The biggest piece I see GeoMoose contributing to, is the CGI calling methods. GeoMoose makes extensive use of the ImageMap building and Query Mechanisms available with MapServer, not just the image rendering. Although the stacking of the images inside of the GeoMoose interface is and has been a novel way of presenting the MapServer contructs (IMO). OpenLayers does this as well to some degree, but I believe the GeoMoose interface provides a greater degree of end user control. I'm interested in promoting more than just MapServer image rendering. Using Mapserver's CGI capabilities with a Client LIB is pretty much the way I've used MapServer since starting up with it over ten years ago. The imagemap (templating) and Query capabilities are just as important as the image rendering. The teaching reference below, was aimed squarely at the idea of using MapServer via it's CGI calling structure, which I've always thought should be demo-ified in some location. But since MapServer (and it's community) hasn't in the past had any particular interest in ratifying a client for use, I never pursued the idea. But now, with that nice OpenLayers window on the MapServer page, the sky's the limit so to speak, as far as setting up demos and including them in the MapServer site, or at least it seems like it should be. :c) bobb Christopher Schmidt 01/14/09 10:37 AM On Wed, Jan 14, 2009 at 09:21:38AM -0600, Bob Basques wrote: All, The only reason I brought it up at all, was that I was playing around with Openlayers myself this week. I pretty much copied the Demo from the MapServer website. Sounds like that was the wrong to go :c) Absolutely. The demo on the MapServer site is using a layer that is generally not needed in any application -- at least not until you're looking for something that can be deployed without a MapServer 'server' in the mix. Benefits of GeoMoose (Main ones) for the normal user. * Fast (because of MapServer tuning.). Smaller footprint The dem on the MapServer main site seems pretty fast to me. Much faster than any non-cached demo I've seen. Are you saying that GeoMoose has tuned MapServer t such an extent that it is faster to render images than it is to serve pre-rendered tiles that demonstrate MapServer's rendering skills? * Handles many layers with ease. The limit is the client hardware, and the control is given to the user as to how many to display. This is a GeoMoose benefit over other client software, but I don't see how it makes a better demo of MapServer's rendering capabilities. * The publishing of the data can be distributed, down to the layer level, including the contents of the popups. Each layer can be managed separately without consequence to the rest of the interface, if it breaks, only that layer is not available. This is a GeoMoose benefit over other client software, but I don't see how it makes a better demo of MapServer's rendering capabilities. * More interface user Control, layer fading, on/off, stacking order, popup on/off. This is a GeoMoose benefit over other client software, but I don't see how it makes a better demo of MapServer's rendering capabilities. * And it's all a client lib as well, just like Openlayers. Closer than you think. This is a GeoMoose benefit over other client software, but I don't see how it makes a better demo of MapServer's rendering capabilities. * If I had to teach MapServer request strategies, I would use MapServer + GeoMoose + Firebug to do it. GeoMoose uses the CGI functionality for images, imagemaps, and querying. I don't knwo what you mean by this, so I can't comment on it. Not that I'm trying to defend GeoMoose. Just wanted to know how to join in on popularizing MapServer. GeoMoose has many advantages over other
Re: [mapserver-users] Mapserver.org sample ...
On Tue, Jan 13, 2009 at 12:57:24PM -0300, Paul james wrote: Thanks Tamas... Is It possible to use OpenLayers with mapscript? In what way? OpenLayers would typically take over many of the roles that a custom application would -- building your application in Javascript instead of PHP. Depending on what you are doing with mapScript, it may be possibl t simply use MapServer as a CGI instead, or it may be possible to implement what you want such that OpenLayers can ccomplish it. On Tue, Jan 13, 2009 at 12:47 PM, Tamas Szekeres szeker...@gmail.comwrote: Paul, This kind of functionality requires some client side scripting like javascript implemented by OpenLayers in this particular case. Best regards, Tamas 2009/1/13 Paul james paulj...@gmail.com Hello guys... Looking at mapserver.org map sample. I´d like to know how can I do something like that ... Can someone point me the right direction to do that? Is it possible to use mapscript c# to do that? Thanks ___ mapserver-users mailing list mapserver-users@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/mapserver-users ___ mapserver-users mailing list mapserver-users@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/mapserver-users -- Christopher Schmidt MetaCarta ___ mapserver-users mailing list mapserver-users@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/mapserver-users
Re: [mapserver-users] Mapserver.org sample ...
Thanks ! Can you point me some quickstart with openlayer + mapserver + tilecache? I´m kind lost on it... I have a custom app using mapscript + postgis... And I´d like to make a version using openlayers and tilecache... On Tue, Jan 13, 2009 at 2:03 PM, Christopher Schmidt crschm...@metacarta.com wrote: On Tue, Jan 13, 2009 at 12:57:24PM -0300, Paul james wrote: Thanks Tamas... Is It possible to use OpenLayers with mapscript? In what way? OpenLayers would typically take over many of the roles that a custom application would -- building your application in Javascript instead of PHP. Depending on what you are doing with mapScript, it may be possibl t simply use MapServer as a CGI instead, or it may be possible to implement what you want such that OpenLayers can ccomplish it. On Tue, Jan 13, 2009 at 12:47 PM, Tamas Szekeres szeker...@gmail.com wrote: Paul, This kind of functionality requires some client side scripting like javascript implemented by OpenLayers in this particular case. Best regards, Tamas 2009/1/13 Paul james paulj...@gmail.com Hello guys... Looking at mapserver.org map sample. I´d like to know how can I do something like that ... Can someone point me the right direction to do that? Is it possible to use mapscript c# to do that? Thanks ___ mapserver-users mailing list mapserver-users@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/mapserver-users ___ mapserver-users mailing list mapserver-users@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/mapserver-users -- Christopher Schmidt MetaCarta ___ mapserver-users mailing list mapserver-users@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/mapserver-users
