[udig-devel] The Table View, previously known as Selection View

[Adrian Custer]

As a stopgag, can you remove the "Filter" portion of the GUI in the
"Table View" formerly-known-as ?

It changes when a rectangle is selected in the Map view, adding a
the_geom clause and making one think that it's doing something. However,
it is simply confusing since it is not doing anything.

cheers,
adrian


On Mon, 2006-05-01 at 09:48 -0700, Myron Wu wrote:
> I meant to send this out earlier, but better late than never....
> 
> The Selection View is obviously in a state of flux and we need to discuss  
> some things for it to move forward.  So we'll start with where it's at now  
> (outstanding bugs excluded for brevity):
> 
> 1.)  It's been renamed to Table View to better reflect what it actually  
> does at the moment; it will always show all features in a layer regardless  
> of what's currently selected.
> 2.)  It only shows the features of the topmost selected layer when there's  
> more than one layer selected.
> 3.)  There's no sorting at the moment and it displays features in whatever  
> order they come in from a given FeatureStore.
> 
> Technical:
> 
> 1.)  It's currently implemented with a Tree and TreeViewer through  
> net.refractions.udig.ui.FeatureTableControl (reason why in a sec).
> 2.)  For increased responsiveness, we have it loading features into the  
> view in a separate thread through a DeferredTreeContentManager  
> + TreeViewer.  See http://www.ji.co.za/unplugged/?p=34 .
> 
> 
> Some questions we need to resolve for it to move forward:
> 
> 1.)  How should we deal with multiple layers?  Seperate tables?  Groupings  
> within a single table?  etc.
> 2.)  How should we deal with the current selection?  Highlighting?   
> Seperate tables or groupings again?
> 
> Technical:
> 
> 1.)  Does it make sense to keep this as a Tree + TreeViewer?  This depends  
> on what we do about responsiveness and how we answer the two questions  
> above.
> 1.1.)  For responsiveness, I think we have a couple options.  What we have  
> now is less than ideal since it loads all features no matter what, which  
> is inefficient.  We can switch to an SWT.VIRTUAL table or tree (added in  
> 3.2M5), to load only features currently seen in the view.  Anything else  
> we can do here?
> 
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Myron
> _______________________________________________
> User-friendly Desktop Internet GIS (uDig)
> http://udig.refractions.net
> http://lists.refractions.net/mailman/listinfo/udig-devel