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

Sorry,Here i go again! #335

Closed
parcool opened this issue Aug 19, 2016 · 7 comments
Closed

Sorry,Here i go again! #335

parcool opened this issue Aug 19, 2016 · 7 comments

Comments

@parcool
Copy link

parcool commented Aug 19, 2016

When mapview(image) less than screen,in other words,when there is interspace between mapview and screen edge ,click the marker and the callout show incorrect position.

do you think this is a way to fix it?
in MarkerLayout.java,
add y -= getTop(); x -= getLeft(); after line 89.

@moagrius
Copy link
Owner

that change would break the code in that method in a number of ways - both getTop and getLeft will always refer to the MarkerLayout instance, not the TileView, or the marker Views, and will always return 0. If it did not return 0, I'm not sure how that would help - especially since line 89 is in a loop so both X and Y would be decremented by top and left times the number of children. This is definitely not a fix.

I'm really not clear on the issue you're describing. Can you please provide STR (steps to reproduce) in one of the demos, and any other information you think would be helpful.

Thanks.

@parcool
Copy link
Author

parcool commented Aug 20, 2016

here is the video to shows what the situation,we can see the touch point which by my pinch zoom and tap,when i add this two lines here,and the problem occur never(yes!i add this code:tileView.setMinimumScaleMode(ZoomPanLayout.MinimumScaleMode.FIT); ).

@p-lr
Copy link
Collaborator

p-lr commented Aug 21, 2016

Confirmed. Duplicate of #338.

moagrius referenced this issue in p-lr/TileView Aug 21, 2016
@moagrius
Copy link
Owner

@parcool thanks for you patience and possible fix - this issue has been accepted and is being worked on.

you referenced line 89 earlier, which in master is in the loop, so my comments in #335 (comment) might not have made sense

@moagrius
Copy link
Owner

@parcool this should be fixed in ad43318 - can you grab the latest master and confirm? if it works, i'll publish a release

@moagrius
Copy link
Owner

you'll need to grab the latest master and run from code, not release

thanks

@moagrius
Copy link
Owner

2.2.1 should fix your issue, re-open or post back if you're still having trouble

thanks for the report

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

No branches or pull requests

3 participants