|
From: jv <cib...@gm...> - 2009-09-23 14:11:01
|
:-) I think in a few weeks we will implement your last option (using both) because we will add support for lat/lon spots. Btw, once you are able to compile and run some examples, geotools is really a very funny library. I really hope we will start soon the new project in order to use it intensively. cheers! On Wed, Sep 23, 2009 at 11:39 AM, Michael Bedward <mic...@gm...> wrote: > Hi jv, > > Well, if you are going to be displaying or printing the maps at fine > scale then it makes sense to use polygons - but in that case I guess > you would really like to use polygons that correspond to the > boundaries of your areas, however they are defined. Then you could > have the outline and fill colours of the polygons based on the status > (Fiability) of each area. > > On the other hand, if you're most interested in broad scale stuff such > that your 10 sq km areas are tiny on the map, then you might as well > use point features and marks for your styling. It's less work. > > Of course, you can do both... > > Michael > -- ======================================================= Javier Moreno www.imaginafoto.com ======================================================= |