3 ms·
No, it's not raw GIS data. Even the vector tiles are generated for a certain scales (or set of scales). They contain only data that should be displayed at given
by vetinari 10y ago
No, it's not raw GIS data. Even the vector tiles are generated for a certain scales (or set of scales). They contain only data that should be displayed at given scales and also the geometries are being generalized depending on the zoom level.
What Mapbox can do, is to _remove_ data that are not in stylesheet - but as I understand it, that is being done server side (https://www.mapbox.com/blog/style-optimized-vector-tiles/ https://www.mapbox.com/blog/style-optimized-vector-tiles/). So in theory you could put more data into generated tiles, users could create their customized stylesheet (would have to be found out how, the server needs to have it accessible, it does processing based on it) and it could work - for a few of them. If everyone would do it, you are back to square one. This is usually usable for a defined roles (what group can see what in your data), not for picking and choosing every possible object at arbitrary scale.
The thing is, you usually cannot put all the data in the tiles and just serve them - most users won't use them anyway, so you would just waste bandwidth. That one guy who wants something special usually wants other object than that second guy, who wants also something special.
- maxerickson 10y agoMapbox does maintain a set of (more?) complete OSM vector tiles, aimed at quality assurance tasks: https://www.mapbox.com/blog/osm-qa-tiles/ https://www.mapbox.com/blog/osm-qa-tiles/
- int_19h 10y agoHow much bandwidth is actually wasted? i.e. if you were to put all data that's currently in OSM, just chunked into tiles, how much bandwidth would be required to serve it? It would seem to me that, as pipes get thicker and bandwidth keeps growing, we will inevitably hit the point where it's easier to just server raw data and let the client render it soon enough.