This is due to two issues:
- goodness of fit: the polygon at the bottom and the polygon at top are too thin compared to the label so they don't get drawn. We should use a smaller default goodness of fit and make it programmable modifiable, which is something someone else also asked for
- the renderer does not try to place the label in a position other than the default label point. We could have it to move the label around
Andrea Aime
added a comment - This is due to two issues:
- goodness of fit: the polygon at the bottom and the polygon at top are too thin compared to the label so they don't get drawn. We should use a smaller default goodness of fit and make it programmable modifiable, which is something someone else also asked for
- the renderer does not try to place the label in a position other than the default label point. We could have it to move the label around
The comuni2.png has been generated using the improved polygon labeller.
Changes:
- the default min goodness of fit has been reduced to 0.5
- if the centroid falls outside an horizontal line is drawn through it and the center of the widest intersection with the polygon is used instead
- if maxDisplacement is used and the centroid is busy with other labels a different position is searched that is no more than maxDisplacement pixels away from the original, and still inside the polygon
The comuni2.png map has been drawn with the following extra parameters:
Andrea Aime
added a comment - The comuni2.png has been generated using the improved polygon labeller.
Changes:
- the default min goodness of fit has been reduced to 0.5
- if the centroid falls outside an horizontal line is drawn through it and the center of the widest intersection with the polygon is used instead
- if maxDisplacement is used and the centroid is busy with other labels a different position is searched that is no more than maxDisplacement pixels away from the original, and still inside the polygon
The comuni2.png map has been drawn with the following extra parameters:
{code}
<VendorOption name="maxDisplacement">50</VendorOption>
<VendorOption name="goodnessOfFit">0.2</VendorOption>
<VendorOption name="autoWrap">100</VendorOption>
{code}
Silvia, let me know if this is what you were looking for.
The position of the candidate label point still leaves quite a bit to be desired, especially in maps like this one where the polygons are anything but convex. GEOT-2822 lays down ideas for a better labelling algorithm (which is, not surprising, not trivial to implement)
Andrea Aime
added a comment - The position of the candidate label point still leaves quite a bit to be desired, especially in maps like this one where the polygons are anything but convex.
GEOT-2822 lays down ideas for a better labelling algorithm (which is, not surprising, not trivial to implement)
Improvement
Closed
Major
- goodness of fit: the polygon at the bottom and the polygon at top are too thin compared to the label so they don't get drawn. We should use a smaller default goodness of fit and make it programmable modifiable, which is something someone else also asked for
- the renderer does not try to place the label in a position other than the default label point. We could have it to move the label around