Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Tile expiration #217

Closed
wants to merge 3 commits into from
Closed

Tile expiration #217

wants to merge 3 commits into from

Conversation

lilleyse
Copy link
Contributor

@lilleyse lilleyse commented May 1, 2017

For #99
Cesium implementation: CesiumGS/cesium#4136

One point I have not addressed yet is

Time expiration should be in the tile (header / feature json) so it can change from request to request.

I wish this didn't have to happen but I can't think of another way.

Each tile's feature table could have a TILE object which mimics the layout of a tile in tileset.json. This will also be helpful for bounding volumes in #92 too.

@lilleyse lilleyse force-pushed the tile-expiration branch 3 times, most recently from 7f626ec to 0edd08a Compare May 8, 2017 19:29
@lilleyse
Copy link
Contributor Author

lilleyse commented May 8, 2017

I started some work on a TILE_METADATA section in the feature table. @pjcozzi do you think this is the right idea?

@pjcozzi
Copy link
Contributor

pjcozzi commented May 18, 2017

I started some work on a TILE_METADATA section in the feature table. @pjcozzi do you think this is the right idea?

I think we'll need something like this to get full mileage out of explicit tiling schemes, but we might also want it to have child tile metadata for efficient culling.

We have two options

  • Push tile expiration post 1.0. I think it can be added in a backwards compatible way and it is not yet a popular feature.
  • Pseudo-design just enough of Implicit tiling schemes #92 to make sure we are going down the right path here.

Perhaps we wait to decide based on how fast the rest of the 1.0 work goes?

@lilleyse
Copy link
Contributor Author

Perhaps we wait to decide based on how fast the rest of the 1.0 work goes?

Sounds good, if expiration doesn't go in that would be ok with me.

@lilleyse
Copy link
Contributor Author

lilleyse commented Nov 5, 2021

Closing due to inactivity

@lilleyse lilleyse closed this Nov 5, 2021
@lilleyse lilleyse deleted the tile-expiration branch November 5, 2021 18:43
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants