I have a client for the WMS-Services of my mapserver. The client program is written in JavaScript and it uses OpenLayers (v. 2.12). The map has as a base layer "Google satellite"-Layer and the Mercator projection. The WMS layers are overlayers. Some of them have as a source data - raster data and some of them have as data - vector data.
I have no problem with WMS "raster" layers. But I have a problem with WMS "vector" layers. If my OpenLayers map is dragged too much to the left and the generated request to mapserver is started, the WMS "vector" layers go to be invisible (and it happens only on the lowest zoom level). I found out that the bbox in generated requests is in some way wrong because the mapserver response is empty: I tested the automatically generated request strings as links in my browser (Firefox or Chrome). I have modified the mapfile and I added the Mercator projection to it. But it did not help. Here is the begin of the map file:
MAP
NAME "africa_southafrica_admin"
PROJECTION
"init=epsg:4326"
"init=epsg:3857"
"init=epsg:900913"
END
STATUS ON
TRANSPARENT ON
UNITS METERS
WEB
METADATA
"wms_srs" "epsg:4326 epsg:3857 epsg:32733 epsg:900913"
"wms_title" "ROCEEH Southafrica"
"wms_onlineresource" "https://www.roceeh.uni-tuebingen.de/cgi-bin/mapserv?map=mapdata/MAP_88361.map"
"wms_enable_request" "*"
"ms_enable_modes" "*"
"labelcache_map_edge_buffer" "-30"
END
END
MAXSIZE 10000
SIZE 2048 2048
EXTENT -180.0 -89.0 180.0 89.0
FONTSET "font/fontset"
LAYER
NAME "SRTM_90m_Screening"
STATUS OFF
CLASS
STYLE
OUTLINECOLOR 102 255 51
END
NAME "Satellite_SRTM_90m"
LABEL
TYPE BITMAP
SIZE SMALL
COLOR 102 255 51
END
END
TOLERANCE 3
PROJECTION
"init=epsg:4326"
"init=epsg:900913"
END
GROUP "Satellite_Data_Index"
LABELITEM "name"
METADATA
"wms_title" "SRTM 90m"
"wms_group_title" "Satellite Data Index"
"wms_abstract" "No information available."
"wms_include_items" "all"
"gml_include_items" "all"
"gml_geometries" "the_geom"
"gml_the_geom_type" "multipolygon"
END
...
Here two requests to Mapserver: the first does not work and the second is fine:
What I can do or how can I control the automatically generated requests to avoid the described misbehavior?