Hello,
Just to add in my two cents to this.
1) I don’t think we should have to specify a projection at the <Map> and
<Layer> level if they are the same as that would seem redundant to me. However, it
should be allowed if a user wants to specify the projection at both levels.
2) Perhaps it would be good form (but not required) to allow "PROJECTION NONE"
to explicitly specify to any client that the scalebar, legend, static map, etc is not
intended to be projected onto a particular part of the earth.
Thanks!
Sincerely,
Mark Volz, GISP
-----Original Message-----
From: mapserver-users <[email protected]> On Behalf Of
[email protected]
Sent: Monday, April 27, 2020 2:28 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: mapserver-users Digest, Vol 147, Issue 28
SWHHS/LYON/LINCOLN COUNTY SECURITY NOTICE:
This email originated from an external sender. Exercise caution before clicking
on any links or attachments and consider whether you know the sender. For more
information please contact IT support.
________________________________
Send mapserver-users mailing list submissions to
[email protected]
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2flists.osgeo.org%2fmailman%2flistinfo%2fmapserver-users&c=E,1,fH9yaFFHC2_hvkuwIMW4WrKaU9eZJWHW-VBcTfuFNHtxAKC1CQ1YicwS_o8K66nDz-TFd_kUsnyr34KSeIFWFFqs6Om-QpVBRYIz7MhLrI8qRYKTuY-bonA-VgwP&typo=1
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
[email protected]
You can reach the person managing the list at
[email protected]
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re:
Contents of mapserver-users digest..."
Today's Topics:
1. Re: Make PROJECTION mandatory? (Basques, Bob (CI-StPaul))
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Mon, 27 Apr 2020 19:16:52 +0000
From: "Basques, Bob (CI-StPaul)" <[email protected]>
To: Steve Lime <[email protected]>, Jeff McKenna
<[email protected]>
Cc: Mapserver <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [mapserver-users] Make PROJECTION mandatory?
Message-ID:
<ch2pr09mb43948caabf943e79676e9eb0f7...@ch2pr09mb4394.namprd09.prod.outlook.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
All,
I can second Steve’s idea. We were using Mapserver for years before we needed
to pay attention to projections, because all of our data wasin our local
coordinate system. We now work projection across all map services for all
layers, either by explicitly stating the projection or having it scripted at
the web server call. Some cases it won’t matter, if ever, and others it will
be instrumental in getting a site working with many and varied projected
datasets being combined.
I would agree that it should be a topic more prominently displayed/noted in the
documentation.
Bobb
From: mapserver-users <[email protected]> On Behalf Of
Steve Lime
Sent: Monday, April 27, 2020 1:21 PM
To: Jeff McKenna <[email protected]>
Cc: Mapserver <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [mapserver-users] Make PROJECTION mandatory?
Think Before You Click: This email originated outside our organization.
I would prefer to pursue as a documentation/communication exercise first. It's
not that I don't agree that PROJECTION blocks are generally recommended but
making them required and introducing artificial projections to deal with cases
when projections aren't used (embedded legends, scale bars and other static map
elements) will touch a lot of code. It's also a major breaking change that
would potentially break a large percentage of mapfiles going forward.
--Steve
On Mon, Apr 27, 2020 at 8:43 AM Jeff McKenna
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
Hi Jukka,
I personally consider defining PROJECTION blocks at the MAP level and all
LAYERs mandatory, in my day-to-day work, for each and every mapfile.
If you do not specify all of these, MapServer makes assumptions and you are
just asking for trouble downstream through WMS clients etc.
(your users)
I also do not rely on any PROJECTION AUTO magic either, for my paying clients.
These are all nice tricks but in critical production environments I stay away
from them; instead, find the source projection, and define the MAP projection
block and all LAYER projection blocks.
I'm not sure this answers your questions, but this was my 'gut reaction'
to your message. I believe we have the same thinking here.
-jeff
--
Jeff McKenna
MapServer Consulting and Training Services
https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fgatewaygeo.com%2f&c=E,1,uRKu6N_CiiNLLVVq0e47_QXUkZM4g9vqte-aBcbYyDH1b7WnS1Ln_b1a9kqHV0iwGwOUs3KazTLN-kMthOESPP3PB65XPBsYDNo99uct63RwastB0y4d0JpRk50,&typo=1
On 2020-04-27 10:36 a.m., Rahkonen Jukka (MML) wrote:
Hi,
Recent Mapserver buids require PROJ and GDAL
https://mapserver.gis.umn.edu/ja/development/rfc/ms-rfc-127.html. That
means that every Mapserver can support PROJECTION blocks both at the
MAP level and within LAYER. And because there are no more builds
without Proj support there is no real need for writing mapfiles
without PROJECTION blocks. Therefore I suggest that such mapfiles
should be considered invalid in the future. If it is for some reason
too strict requirement, what if we at least edit the documentation
https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fmapserver.org%2fma
pfile%2fprojection.html&c=E,1,0fhb3f14X4JnWaND9-ffdGhd-Dt86B_opKe9hGsU
rG9BAz5MAFfY4va3fbKeVLpkpU7_UF3pNaH-rfzX6lyAkuRFz_4jFWPHVTfeNvPEY5eLCH
yJIN7bQ1TIPip6&typo=1 so that it really encourages users to write the
PROJECTION blocks. GetCapabilities could also show something like
<!-- WARNING: No explicit source projection defined for layer
'my_layer'. -->
Having layers without PROJECTION saves users from writing this much text:
“PROJECTION "init=epsg:3857" END
but when the user meets any problem with accessing data or rendering
the first thing to check is the projection. In the mailing list it
means one more question-answer round before getting closer to the real
problem – if the problem was not in the projection, as it very often is.
If source data are in local coordinate system it would be better to
define also that explicitly with a special keyword like PROJECTION “LOCAL”.
Would other user consider making projection compulsory rather as an
improvement or inconvenience?
-Jukka Rahkonen-
_______________________________________________
mapserver-users mailing list
[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]
https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2flists.osgeo.org%2f
mailman%2flistinfo%2fmapserver-users&c=E,1,SKUjKqRwIeFRAc02DA-HvDd0MhI
4jyQ2ufljOuLY7qnb4BO2tsp-93Uz94xMPlp-ph-zvFw8arVLo9voGZJkvRYpdJ8KrHH_S
XGtMLLaQxJhypE,&typo=1
_______________________________________________
mapserver-users mailing list
[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2flists.osgeo.org%2fmailman%2flistinfo%2fmapserver-users&c=E,1,5jEh9uf3O2tJwySsW_GwIzo6GO1cZ-SUBE9lG-SsOJU3VBXvXos48WKdE1xpf-k0EVRxx3fCgdRbOjR1Qre_pElTqHiO5-amlVemT67DQHYP2NL1Qti8pY8,&typo=1
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=http%3a%2f%2flists.osgeo.org%2fpipermail%2fmapserver-users%2fattachments%2f20200427%2f32e4771d%2fattachment-0001.html&c=E,1,-gv1SBk8r6ITlWWwYNlthF9RHuDWYIFTEq0uuOWuGRg8FbMp0s1amctpimmBX0Opeh670ooWsH64sndhLEJhpwXcWS09YoVtkW1W_CzHtGEM_w,,&typo=1>
_______________________________________________
mapserver-users mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/mapserver-users
