<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:st1="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40">
<head>
<meta http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=us-ascii">
<meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 11 (filtered medium)">
<!--[if !mso]>
<style>
v\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
o\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
w\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
.shape {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
</style>
<![endif]--><o:SmartTagType
namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" name="State"/>
<o:SmartTagType namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags"
name="City"/>
<o:SmartTagType namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags"
name="country-region"/>
<o:SmartTagType namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags"
name="place"/>
<!--[if !mso]>
<style>
st1\:*{behavior:url(#default#ieooui) }
</style>
<![endif]-->
<style>
<!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:Tahoma;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0pt;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
span.EmailStyle18
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:Arial;
color:navy;}
@page Section1
{size:612.0pt 792.0pt;
margin:72.0pt 90.0pt 72.0pt 90.0pt;}
div.Section1
{page:Section1;}
-->
</style>
</head>
<body lang=EN-US link=blue vlink=blue>
<div class=Section1>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'>Aaron – I don’t think it is a
silly question at all. Rather an obvious one that needs to be asked.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'>I too would like to hear what people think
are the differences between community mapbuilder, OpenLayers and the
client-side Ka-map code. All three projects seem to have very similar goals,
to create a client-side library that is easy to use and independent of the
server-side map engine.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'>Brian Fischer</span></font><font
color=navy><span style='color:navy'><o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'>Houston Engineering, Inc.</span></font><font
color=navy><span style='color:navy'><o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><st1:place w:st="on"><st1:City w:st="on"><font size=2
color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial;
color:navy'>Maple Grove</span></font></st1:City><font size=2 color=navy
face=Arial><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'>, <st1:State
w:st="on">MN</st1:State></span></font></st1:place><font color=navy><span
style='color:navy'><o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'>(763) 493-4522</span></font><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<div class=MsoNormal align=center style='text-align:center'><font size=3
face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:12.0pt'>
<hr size=2 width="100%" align=center tabindex=-1>
</span></font></div>
<p class=MsoNormal><b><font size=2 face=Tahoma><span style='font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Tahoma;font-weight:bold'>From:</span></font></b><font size=2
face=Tahoma><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Tahoma'>
ka-map-users-bounces@lists.maptools.org
[mailto:ka-map-users-bounces@lists.maptools.org] <b><span style='font-weight:
bold'>On Behalf Of </span></b>Aaron Koning<br>
<b><span style='font-weight:bold'>Sent:</span></b> Wednesday, June 21, 2006
11:02 AM<br>
<b><span style='font-weight:bold'>To:</span></b>
ka-map-users@lists.maptools.org<br>
<b><span style='font-weight:bold'>Subject:</span></b> Re: [ka-Map-users] ka-Map
and OpenLayers</span></font><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
12.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='margin-bottom:12.0pt'><font size=3
face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:12.0pt'>Let me ask a silly
question. As Tim has described the 2 components below, how similar would number
1 (Merge ka-Map client side functionality with OpenLayers) be when compared to
Community Mapbuilder? is there potential for a three way merge and/or concentration
on the most robust client side mapper of the three? Just trying to make life
more complicated... or simpler...<br>
<br>
Aaron<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><span class=gmailquote><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span
style='font-size:12.0pt'>On 6/21/06, <b><span style='font-weight:bold'>Tim
Schaub</span></b> <<a href="mailto:tim@commenspace.org">tim@commenspace.org</a>>
wrote:</span></font></span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
12.0pt'>Hi All-<br>
<br>
I like the idea of a merger and look forward to more discussion. In<br>
general, I think pushing as much functionality as possible to the client<br>
side is a good idea. For ka-Map, I'm imagining that a merger would
mean <br>
all client side niceties could be retained (or improved) and all server<br>
side functionality would be OGC spec. So, the server side tiling,<br>
caching, etc could be retained as long as it conformed to the yet to be<br>
determined WMS-C specifications.<br>
<br>
Maybe it would make more sense to say that this is really a proposal to<br>
split ka-Map in half - so the two part proposal would be:<br>
1) Merge ka-Map client side functionality with OpenLayers. <br>
2) Create a WMS-C compliant tile server out of the server side<br>
functionality of ka-Map.<br>
<br>
I imagine that people who used the results of #1 above (let's say it's<br>
still called OpenLayers), would choose from a variety of tile services. <br>
The results of #2 above (say it's still called ka-Map, or maybe ka-Tile)<br>
would only be one of the options for a server side solution.<br>
<br>
So, limitations come up when you want to add functionality to the client<br>
side that relies on custom server side functionality (that wouldn't be<br>
shared by all WMS-C options). An example limitation would be a nice<br>
print to PDF tool. I think this can easily be addressed by custom<br>
libraries or extensions. Developing a print to PDF tool would
involve <br>
creating a tool that could plug in to the client side and call custom<br>
code on the server side. Though this is essentially how things are
done<br>
already, it seems a cleaner way to develop - requiring that the<br>
application can stand alone without the custom tools. I think others
<br>
would probably agree that ka-Map could benefit from more modular<br>
customizations.<br>
<br>
In terms of the other differences that Paul brings up:<br>
<br>
> * core tiling engine is very similar, but it is not quite as <br>
> optimal (doesn't reuse images for instance)<br>
<br>
I think you mean the client side tile handling here. If so, the
merged<br>
client-side application would use the most optimal scheme.<br>
<br>
> * overlay stuff is point/text only <br>
<br>
Again, the merged client-side application would make use of the most<br>
mature stuff.<br>
<br>
> * lacking tools (layer controls, scale bar etc) and the<br>
> windowing stuff<br>
<br>
I'm planning on rewriting the scale bar for prototype.js and<br>
contributing it to OpenLayers - so that's one small piece.<br>
<br>
> * lacking query capability<br>
<br>
I don't know enough about WFS querying to know what the real limitations<br>
might be. It seems like this one deserves some more consideration. <br>
Though, I do like the idea of having all "template" style stuff (to<br>
handle query responses) on the client side.<br>
<br>
> * tile caching<br>
<br>
If a WMS-C specification is decided upon, the current tile.php <br>
functionality could be modified to conform to that. In developing
the<br>
specification, a better cache design might arise too.<br>
<br>
Looking forward to more,<br>
Tim<br>
<br>
_______________________________________________ <br>
ka-Map-users mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:ka-Map-users@lists.maptools.org">ka-Map-users@lists.maptools.org</a><br>
<a href="http://lists.maptools.org/mailman/listinfo/ka-map-users">http://lists.maptools.org/mailman/listinfo/ka-map-users
</a><o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
</div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
12.0pt'><br>
<br clear=all>
<br>
-- <br>
+--------------------------------------------<br>
| Aaron Koning<br>
| Information Technologist<br>
| <st1:place w:st="on"><st1:City w:st="on">Prince George</st1:City>,
<st1:State w:st="on">BC</st1:State>, <st1:country-region w:st="on">Canada</st1:country-region></st1:place>.<br>
+-------------------------------------------- <br>
| <a href="http://datashare.gis.unbc.ca/fist/">http://datashare.gis.unbc.ca/fist/</a><br>
| <a href="http://datashare.gis.unbc.ca/gctp-js/">http://datashare.gis.unbc.ca/gctp-js/</a><br>
+-------------------------------------------- <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
</div>
</body>
</html>