|
|
|
|
|
|
by birdstheword5
1074 days ago
|
|
|
I'm glad its a tossup for other people! I've been debating it with myself for a long time. I agree very much with your "cartographic control" point. I should have been more specific when talking about performance. For a raster tile, if it is performing badly on the server, that is solvable because you can pre-render beforehand. For vector tiles (which I guess most of the time are coming from a MBTiles file which is a cache) if they are performing badly in the user's browser its not really solvable because you can't do this pre-render step. The only solution would be to find a way to simplify the data more to lessen the load on the user's browser. I don't know if you have a similar experience? |
|
|
Yes, that's exactly the challenge. How DO you simplify/compress the data so as to convey the same information with less bits? That's effectively re-stating the fundamental problem of cartography.
Pragmatically, at web mercator z12, what features do you want to show? How about z14? An effective mapping service will dynamically provide the necessary data for a given zoom level, provided that you've defined "necessary" for each potential render.