[QGIS-Developer] QGIS Server and the Grants programme

[Andreas Neumann]

Fully agreed with Richard here. 

OGC standards are important and even required by law. Other protocols
are ok though, if they are in addition. If they prove to better in the
future than OGC, then they might eventually replace the former. But
first, they would have to prove good interoperability and that they are
better. 

Regarding vector styles: 

I hadn't seen a complex, convincing vector style client-side rendering
yet. Mapbox and Maptiler come closest - but even these two are "mickey
mouse" maps compared to what national mapping agencies in our countries
established in quality over decades in their printed and raster map
product lines. 

In our country, Swisstopo (the national mapping provider) experimented
with vector tiles. The result: 

 	* it renders slower than the raster tile maps
 	* the CPU of the client is busier than with raster tiles
 	* the cartographic quality is disappointing. Many years away from the
original raster tile quality

The main advantage of vector tiles would be that the user could switch
colors - but did you ever have the need to switch colors in a we map?
Defacing a map where cartographers spent a lot of time figuring out the
correct color combos? 

Replicating QGIS rendering for vector tiles outside of QGIS in a totally
separate technology from qt rendering would be an interesting project,
but would always be different, lagging and would be a lot of effort. But
if someone finds a sponsor for that, it could be interesting. 

Andreas 

On 2020-06-09 08:24, Richard Duivenvoorde wrote:

> On 6/9/20 1:18 AM, Nyall Dawson wrote: 
> 
>> Something else to consider is whether technologies like WMS are
>> ultimately just "dead end" technologies now,
> 
> Definitely not agreeing here :-)
> 
>> and possibly we'd be
>> better off focusing on client side rendering of vector features from a
>> server (QGIS or other), and providing a library which can do
>> client-side rendering of vector tiles from QGIS symbology in as close
>> to 1:1 as possible...
> 
> For full blown nice reference maps or aerials  WM(T)S is still the way
> to go. For simpler reference maps like Google, vector tiles will be...
> 
> Building a QGIS rendering engine in a browser, will always be behind (IF
> it will ever reach the same amount of features).
> 
> In my view the unique selling point of QGIS Desktop/Server combi is (or
> should be) the ease to create beautiful maps easily on a desktop and
> then publish them (including metadata) to a server/service...
> Just like our commercial brother does with it's services.
> 
> And mind you: while not perfect WMS/WFS are real standards understood
> and used by a lot of servers and clients.
> 
> Vector tiles are great (or at least promising), but I've not seen any
> client-side cartographic rendering of them yet.
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Richard Duivenvoorde
> _______________________________________________
> QGIS-Developer mailing list
> QGIS-Developer at lists.osgeo.org
> List info: https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/qgis-developer/attachments/20200609/f5513b52/attachment.html>