[ka-Map-users] Same API, but map images instead of tiles

[Delfos, Jacob]

Steve,

I can see your point of view, in the sense that when using a few heavy
raster layers, it's easy to get your server overloaded by tile-requests.
But what would such a solution have to improve over Chameleon (and
others), which can be used in an almost no-page-refresh way? Also,
generating and serving out an image as large as a Ka-Map viewport for
every redraw is quite CPU and Bandwidth expensive... The client-side
caching of tiles helps reduce this issue significantly.

But I agree that keeping application development separate from
deployment issues is beneficial.

Regards,

Jacob


 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: ka-map-users-bounces at lists.maptools.org 
> [mailto:ka-map-users-bounces at lists.maptools.org] On Behalf Of 
> Stephen Woodbridge
> Sent: 19 September 2005 02:50
> To: ka-map-users at lists.maptools.org
> Subject: [ka-Map-users] Same API, but map images instead of tiles
> 
> Hi Paul,
> 
> I really like a lot of what is happening with ka-map. It is 
> great to see 
> all the community effort going into ka-map.
> 
> I was wondering what it would take to make it work without 
> tiles as an 
> option. The idea would be that most of the code and logic 
> would be the 
> same but instead of pulling tiles it would just request a 
> single image. 
> On a pan the current image would slide like the current code 
> and a new 
> image would be requested and replace the partially obstructed 
> image from 
> the pan operation when it is ready. I was thinking that this 
> part (ie: 
> tile vs map image rendering) could be broken into two separate models 
> with a common API and then depending on which was used you would get 
> different rendering behavior.
> 
> Why would anyone want this?
> 
> 1) less server requests
> 2) no need for tiles and managing the tiles and disk space
> 3) maintains the rich no page refresh UI
> 4) would allow richer server side image manipulation than 
> exists today 
> because of the need to generate generic tiles.
> 5) separates application development from deploy concerns and issues
> 6) would allow ka-map to do something that google can not do
> 
> Anyway, I thought I would float the idea and see what you had to say. 
> Also I'm interested if others on the list think there would 
> be value for 
> something like this.
> 
> -Steve W.
> _______________________________________________
> ka-Map-users mailing list
> ka-Map-users at lists.maptools.org
> http://lists.maptools.org/mailman/listinfo/ka-map-users
>