LatLongBoundingBox?

[Bernhard Reiter]

On Mon, Dec 27, 2004 at 11:10:58AM -0500, Russell Nelson wrote:
> Bernhard Reiter writes:
>  > I am not sure that Thuban can find out precisely what is wrong, but
>  > a warning if it finds out that something is wrong seems the right
>  > way to me. We could even pop a dialog up which has a longer
>  > explanation.
>  > 
>  > Another idea to work around the problems would to be to have an
>  > outline mode that always makes at least one red dot when a layer is
>  > outside the current view being to small or so.
>  > Otherwise it mark the bounding box.
> 
> Well, part of the problem of having an unprojected or misprojected
> layer is that "zoom to the full map extent" does the wrong thing
> **from the user's point of view**.  For example, if you have data in
> one UTM zone, and select a map projection in a different zone, zooming
> to the full map extent causes your data to disappear.  Disappearing
> data is very disconcerting to a user!

I agree.

> IMHO, if you have a layer which has been selected to be visible, and
> its LatLonBoundingBox does not overlap the current map view, the
> corner or edge closest to the data should say "LAYERNAME is over
> there" with an arrow.  If you don't want to see that, and you *meant*
> for the layer to be off the map, turn off its visibility.
> 
> Does anybody else think that's a good thing to have?

This is something similiar to the red dot idea I outlined above.
I think it is a good idea to have such a target tracking mode
in one or the other way. Using a red color in a frame could help us
to signal the other potential situations, too.
Like when you are too much into a layer to actually see a feature,
then the hole frame could be red.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://www.intevation.de/pipermail/thuban-devel/attachments/20041227/6698547a/attachment.bin