Versions Compared

Key

  • This line was added.
  • This line was removed.
  • Formatting was changed.
Comment: Migrated to Confluence 5.3

Motivation:

MapLayer is doing too much

Contact:

full name

Tracker:

GEOT-3136 GEOT-3150 GEOT-3565

Tagline:

Excerpt

the map is back

This page represents the current plan; for discussion please check the tracker link above.

Section
Column
width70%
Table of Contents
Column

Children:

Children Display

Summary

MapContext and MapLayer have really grown over time - and in some cases have diverged from their actual use.

The focus is on cleaning up MapLayer:

  • MapLayer replaced by Layer class
  • Specific Layer subclasses for different kinds of content; this is an open ended set allowing additional kinds of layers to be added over time for TileServers, Google Maps and so forth
  • DefaultMapLayer re-factored to use an internal Layer delegate (so existing code will not be broken; and importantly will not be duplicated)

Over the course of the proposal MapContext and DefaultMapContext were also re-factored:

  • Turn MapContext into a class allowing DefaultmapContext to be deprecated (same solution as Query)
  • Super class called MapContent introduced
    • MapContent uses layers() method to provide direct access to the layer list
    • MapContent improved "viewport" methods
  • Responsibilities for maintaining "area of interest" will be isolated into a separate MapViewport class
    • MapContent can use a Mapviewport internally to maintain screen and where to draw information
    • MapViewport can be used directly when drawing the same MapContent into several tiles

This proposal does not break any existing API; it provides a safe migration path forward (and like the Query proposal) makes use of classes directly for a simplified experience.

Status

This proposal is ready for voting; initial commit targeted for Sunday June 12th.

Voting has not started yet:

Tasks

 

no progress

(tick)

done

(error)

impeded

(warning)

lack mandate/funds/time

(question)

volunteer needed

Initial refactoring:

  1. (tick) Layer abstract class
  2. (tick) Split apart DefaultMapLayer into specific implementations
    • (tick) FeatureLayer
    • (tick) GridCoverageLayer
    • (tick) WMSLayer
    • (tick) GridReaderLayer
  3. (tick) Introduce DirectLayer subclass
    • (tick) MessageDirectLayer - example implementation
  4. (tick) Refractor DefaultMapLayer to use a delegate Layer
    • (tick) implement methods making use of internal Layer
    • (tick) implement equals and hashcode against internal Layer; making it a pure wrapper
  5. (tick) Refractor DefaultMapContext
    • (tick) Refractor renderer methods into MapContent and MapViewport
    • (tick) Remove Collection<Object> support
    • (tick) Change MapContext into a class extending MapContent

Related activities:

  • (warning) Update internals of GTRenderer implementations to take advantage of new classes
  • (warning) Update gt-swing code to take advantage of new classes

Documentation Changes

  • Target for sphinx documentation

History and Motivation

The MapContext (and MapLayer) classes are the last on Jody Garnett's top-to-bottom QA run for GeoTools 3.0. I am not quite sure of the history and motivation behind these classes; I suspect they were created by James in his early work on the SLD specification, or perhaps Martin in his working a "Lite" Java renderer. Oh wait it says Cameron Shorter (gasp!)

Here is where we are at today:

Code Block
public interface MapLayer {
  getFeatureSource()
  getSource()
  getStyle()
  setStyle(Style)
  getTitle()
  setTitle(String)
  isVisible()
  setVisible(boolean)
  isSelected()
  setSelected(boolean)
  getQuery()
  setQuery(Query)
  getBounds()
  addMapLayerListener(MapLayerListener)
  removeMapLayerListener(MapLayerListener)
}

There is one implementation with an impressive array of constructors:

Code Block
public class DefaultMapLayer implements MapLayer {
   DefaultMapLayer(FeatureSource, Style, String)
   DefaultMapLayer(CollectionSource, Style, String)
   DefaultMapLayer(FeatureSource, Style)
   DefaultMapLayer(FeatureCollection, Style, String)
   DefaultMapLayer(Collection, Style, String)
   DefaultMapLayer(FeatureCollection, Style)
   DefaultMapLayer(Collection, Style)
   DefaultMapLayer(GridCoverage, Style)
   DefaultMapLayer(AbstractGridCoverage2DReader, Style, String, GeneralParameterValue[])
   DefaultMapLayer(AbstractGridCoverage2DReader, Style, String)
   DefaultMapLayer(AbstractGridCoverage2DReader, Style)
   DefaultMapLayer(GridCoverage, Style, String)
   ...
}

Over time they have been hooked up to more and different kinds of data with some truly amazing twists and turns in order to:

  • Render a FeatureCollection: This is obviously the start (ie what MapLayer) is responsible for rendering. These days it is always wrapped up in a DataUtilities.collection( featureCollection ) call so that a FeatureSource is available.
  • Render a FeatureSource: This is what we want to work with today; the FeatureSource api allows the renderer to perform queries against the data; and better yet look at the capabilities of the feature source in order to perform these efficiently; decimate the geometry and other assort tricks
  • Render a Grid Coverage: formally GridCoverages extend Feature; so you should just be able to render one correct? Well for GeoTools you package up the GridCoverage in a Feature with a magic FeatureType which it knows to un wrap it out of the Feature and then draw it as a GridCoverage.
  • Render a Grid Coverage: You thought that was fun? Well after looking at the fun low memory use provided by FeatureSource GeoTools 2.3 had a go at making use of a GridCoverageReader. Just pop a read into your feature and proceed like normal (can that be considered normal?)
  • Web Map Server Layer: a couple of attempts have been tried; the current one ends up as a GridCoveargeReader as above and is working quite well
  • Collection: a collection can also be used to render "Plain old Java Objects"; all that is needed expression based access provided by a PropertyAccessor implementation - currently supports use of Java Beans

Notes:

  • My original idea was to follow the progress of the "Open Web Service" Context specification; it is formally defining different layers.
  • The OSGeo Foundation standards list is coming up with OWS Context conventions for more then just OGC services (WMS-C, Google Maps etc...)

Proposal

So the proposal is pretty straight forward; a one two punch.

MapLayer to Layer

Here is a plan to tame map layer; while not breaking any existing client code:

  1. Introduce "Layer" as an abstract super class
  2. Create subclasses for each kind of content: GridCoverageLayer, FeatureSourceLayer, WMSLayer, etc... and Unit test the heck out of them
  3. Set up DefaultMapLayer to have a delegate Layer; have each constructor create the appropriate Layer instance to act as the delegate
  • Change MapLayer over to a class; and make it a pure data object with equals and hashcode based on the internal Layer

Note the class MapLayer gained the following method:

Code Block
@Deprecated
public interface MapLayer(){
  ..
  Layer toLayer();
}

Notes:

  • We are deliberately using an abstract super class rather then an interface for Layer because life is short and we don't want to break people over time.
  • In general each layer should have data + style at the end of the day
  • These are all concrete layers represented as specific combinations of data+style
  • New code examples will use the concrete classes directly; however DefaultMapLayer constructors will still function

Planning for DirectLayer

  1. We can now introduce the concept of "DirectLayer" that is a layer that is responsible for its own paint method
    • This can be used for WMS
    • Map decorations such as scalebars or grids
  2. Other concrete Layers
    • TileSet layers (provided by WMS-C or WMTS etc...)

DefaultMapContext to MapContent

Not a lot of thought needed on this one; the Interface/Class has grown over time and can be cut back:

  • remove layer management methods; replace with direct access to a layers list
  • remove addLayer variations as Layer instances should make this explicit now
  • remove "ogc context" information such as title, keywords, abstract and replace with a "user data" map
  • Set up MapContent <|-- MapContext <|-- DefaultMapContext
  • Isolate "viewport code" into a MapViewport class

I would like to move to an abstract class here; I can make DefaultMapContext extend it so that there is no code breakage.

Discussion and Ideas

Andrea had a number of ideas, but I could not keep track of them all:

  • (tick) remove Collection<Object> as it is a pain to support and not used
  • map context taking a referenced envelope is a pain for users (as it is hard to make referenced envelope of the correct aspect ratio)
    • the idea of "location+scale" - andrea did not like this because scale is hard to define. The idea of using "zoom" (ie ratio of pixel to map unit) may however be okay
    • mbedward would like to see this viewport model stuff seperate from the map context
  • there is a handover between streaming renderer and grid coverage renderer, perhaps this could be better represented as a DirectLayer
  • Imagine we need a bit of a review of how a MapLayer is connected with some code that is capable of rendering it. We may be able to handle this by producing a List<DirectLayer> where some of the entries are a specific renderer "Wrapped around" the original Layer
  • Taking these kind of steps should allow the rendering system to be better able to be multithreaded
  • Some of the methods are specific to the visual JMapPane such as isSelected; once again this could be handled as a wrapper specific to the application in question

Discussion of listeners:

  • Implementation uses CopyOnWriteArray for threadsafty; and is agressive about setting up listeners only if client code starts listening
  • Looked into using WeakReferences to hold listeners ... but it would clean up the kind of listeners we want to keep (say a listener that writes log information; or sends email) but not clean up the kind of listeners we want to throw away (listeners on user interface / featureSource etc...)
  • Explored use of List<Reference<XXXListener>> so that list could contain Reference and WeakReference on a case by case basis - added complexity not worth it

Use of dispose()

  • We all don't like the use of dispose()
  • We need dispose to clean up the listeners (see above)
  • It should remove references to featureSource, grid coverage reader etc .. but not close them
  • will use finalize to scream out a warning should dispose() not be called