From: anarcat Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2014 23:08:25 +0000 (-0400) Subject: move the comments in the right place, add my comments X-Git-Url: https://sipb.mit.edu/gitweb.cgi/ikiwiki.git/commitdiff_plain/7a9b0888393365c982d728033732e140271510f1 move the comments in the right place, add my comments --- diff --git a/doc/bugs/osm_plugin_error_TypeError:_mapProjection_is_null.mdwn b/doc/bugs/osm_plugin_error_TypeError:_mapProjection_is_null.mdwn index c81ed6ae8..1b2d40a12 100644 --- a/doc/bugs/osm_plugin_error_TypeError:_mapProjection_is_null.mdwn +++ b/doc/bugs/osm_plugin_error_TypeError:_mapProjection_is_null.mdwn @@ -12,3 +12,98 @@ I have produced a patch for this issue, but beware, while it appears to fix the >> over on the todo page for that branch. Feel free to move my >> review comments for it here if you want to split the discussion. --[[smcv]] >> [[!tag reviewed]] + +Here's [[smcv]]'s review from [[todo/osm_plugin_GeoJSON_popup_patch]], annotated with my comments. --[[anarcat]] + +> It would be good if the commit added documentation for the new feature, +> probably in `doc/ikiwiki/directive/osm.mdwn`. +> +> + my @layers = [ 'OSM' ]; +> +> You mean `$layers`. `[]` is a scalar value (a reference to an array); +> `@something` is an array. + +>> Or `@layers = ( 'OSM' );`. --[[anarcat]] + +> + @layers = [ split(/,/, $params{layers}) ]; +> +> Is comma-separated the best fit here? Would whitespace, or whitespace and/or +> commas, work better? + +>> Why don't we simply keep it an array as it already is? I fail to see the reason behind that change. This is the config I use right now on http://reseaulibre.ca/: +>> +>> ~~~~ +>> osm_layers: +>> - http://a.tile.stamen.com/toner/${z}/${x}/${y}.png +>> - OSM +>> - GoogleHybrid +>> ~~~~ +>> +>> It works fine. At the very least, we should *default* to the configuration set in the the .setup file, so this chunk of the patch should go: +>> +>> ~~~~ +>> - $options{'layers'} = $config{osm_layers}; +>> ~~~~ +>> +>> Maybe the best would be to use `$config{osm_layers};` as a default? --[[anarcat]] + +> It's difficult to compare without knowing what the values would look like. +> What would be valid values? The documentation for `$config{osm_layers}` +> says "in a syntax acceptable for OpenLayers.Layer.OSM.url parameter" so +> perhaps: +> +> # expected by current branch +> \[[!osm layers="OSM,WTF,OMG"]] +> \[[!osm layers="http://example.com/${z}/${x}/${y}.png,http://example.org/tiles/${z}/${x}/${y}.png"]] +> # current branch would misbehave with this syntax but it could be +> made to work +> \[[!osm layers="OSM, WTF, OMG"]] +> \[[!osm layers="""http://example.com/${z}/${x}/${y}.png, +> http://example.org/tiles/${z}/${x}/${y}.png"""]] +> # I would personally suggest whitespace as separator (split(' ', ...)) +> \[[!osm layers="OSM WTF OMG"]] +> \[[!osm layers="""http://example.com/${z}/${x}/${y}.png +> http://example.org/tiles/${z}/${x}/${y}.png"""]] +> +> If you specify more than one layer, is it like "get tiles from OpenCycleMap +> server A or B or C as a round-robin", or "draw OpenCycleMap and then overlay +> county boundaries and then overlay locations of good pubs", or what? + +>> Multiple layers support means that the user is shown the first layer by default, but can also choose to flip to another layer. See again http://reseaulibre.ca/ for an example. --[[anarcat]] + +> + layers => @layers, +> +> If @layers didn't have exactly one item, this would mess up argument-parsing; +> but it has exactly one item (a reference to an array), so it works. +> Again, if you replace @layers with $layers throughout, that would be better. +> +> - $options{'layers'} = $config{osm_layers}; +> +> Shouldn't the default if no `$params{layers}` are given be this, rather +> than a hard-coded `['OSM']`? + +>> Agreed. --[[anarcat]] + +> `getsetup()` says `osm_layers` is `safe => 0`, which approximately means +> "don't put this in the web UI, changing it could lead to a security flaw +> or an unusable website". Is that wrong? If it is indeed unsafe, then +> I would expect changing the same thing via \[[!osm]] parameters to be +> unsafe too. + +>> I put that at `safe=>0` as a security precaution, because I didn't +>> exactly know what that setting did. +>> +>> It is unclear to me whether this could lead to a security flaw. The +>> osm_layers parameter, in particular, simply decides which tiles get +>> loaded in OpenLayers, but it is unclear to me if this is safe to change +>> or not. --[[anarcat]] + +> I notice that `example => { 'OSM', 'GoogleSatellite' }` is wrong: +> it should (probably) be `example => [ 'OSM', 'GoogleSatellite' ]` +> (a list of two example values, not a map with key 'OSM' corresponding +> to value 'GoogleSatellite'. That might be why you're having trouble +> with this. + +>> That is an accurate statement. +>> +>> This is old code, so my memory may be cold, but i think that the "layers" parameters used to be a hash, not an array, until two years ago (commit 636e04a). The javascript code certainly expects an array right now. --[[anarcat]]