a question about my mapviewer program

[Bernhard Reiter]

On Mon, Dec 27, 2004 at 02:11:14PM -0500, Russell Nelson wrote:

> mapviewer presents those tiles to you as a seamless scrollable UTM
> map.  It fetches tiles from a cache or from Terraserver on-demand.
> The net effect is a base raster layer which covers an entire UTM zone.
> 
> If you're running Fedora, everything you need is already installed.
> If anybody wants to give it a try, I'll do a release of the current
> code.

For the sake of the FreeGIS community, a release certainly is nice
or is there CVS access? ;)

> Right now, it mostly just displays maps.  However, I'm starting to add
> code to edit shapefiles.  I have it displaying a line, which you can
> save to a file and load from a file.  You can add a point to the end
> of it, and delete that point.
> 
> 
> Here's my question: Before I run off a create my own shapefile viewer
> and editor, would I do better to 1) create a Terraserver layer for
> Thuban, and 2) improve Thuban's layer editor extension?  The reasons
> why I might not want to are 1) Thuban depends on a bunch of libraries
> whereas mapviewer runs on Fedora without any dependencies, 2) Thuban
> uses wxWindows whereas mapviewer uses (and I am more familiar with)
> GTK2, and 3) I'm not sure that the Thuban maintainers are interested
> in being able to edit layers.
> 
> Is ANYBODY else besides myself interested in using Terraserver maps?
> In being able to edit layers?

3)
The Thuban maintainer are interested in editing layers.
We even have an experimental drawshape extension, also see
the road map: http://thuban.intevation.org/roadmap.html

2) 
I do not think that wxWidgets gets too much in the way, the big
advantage is its use of native widget sets on Mac OS and Windows.
Personally I believe in components that only need to be learned once 
by the user but can be taken to each platform that the user wants.

1)
Usually dependencies are handled by packaging system, I have heard
fedora has a nice one. We made Thuban available on it, so usually
this is not a hassle for users. On the technological point of view:
depending on well developed libraries makes your application more robust.

I would do it with a Thuban layer.
The speed on how you can do an implementation 
depends a bit on how fast Thuban is getting a buffering concept 
and a nice editing concept. Currently Thuban's raster capabilities
are not that developed.

	Bernhard R.
-------------- 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/d71f9a1c/attachment.bin