3 ms·
The initial idea was to use a tileserver-based approach like leaflet. Writing a custom renderer allowed us to have unique views per client infinitely deep that
by chromakode 12y ago
The initial idea was to use a tileserver-based approach like leaflet. Writing a custom renderer allowed us to have unique views per client infinitely deep that zoomed smoothly, rather than at fixed intervals. Another benefit is avoiding the on-disk size and generation CPU time of building tiles, as well as the bandwidth costs of serving a bunch of redundant views of the same image data.
- ygra 12y agoAs someone who helped convert #1110 (Click and drag) into one of the (subjectively) better zooming implementations (http://dump.ventero.de/xkcd1110/ http://dump.ventero.de/xkcd1110/), I immediately wondered whether Pixels would benefit from Seadragon as well. Then I noticed that it's infinite and I wasn't quite sure anymore whether a DZI could do that properly. Perhaps by generating a sparse DZI on the fly in the browser. But that way probably lies madness, too. Also anti-aliasing would have to be turned off beyond 100 % zoom of individual images, which I'm not sure is trivial to hack in there. Still, I think from a UX perspective the slightly springy behaviour of Seadragon is much nicer than the algorithmic rigidity of things like Leaflet or Google Maps.