There are two bug advantages to using vector maps:
Server costs. By switching to using protomaps the costs are a
fraction of those serving up pre-rendered PNG tiles. See
https://docs.protomaps.com/deploy/cost for analysis.
Dynamic maps. The maps can be 'styled' on the fly meaning that
we could highlight points-of-interest or hide unimportant data
depending on the context that the user is operating in.
maplibre is a branch from mapbox at the point where they changed their
licensing. It's probably the most complete and widely used open source
map rendering solution. The CPU usage appears to be similar to using
pre-rendered maps, though we should keep an eye on this.
Initially we're getting the vector tiles from maptiler, and they are not in protomap
format. However, I have tested using protomap as the tile provider and that also
works well. The protomap default basemaps don't have the POIs that are available
in maptiler so sticking with maptiler until we roll our own.
There are two bug advantages to using vector maps:
Server costs. By switching to using protomaps the costs are a fraction of those serving up pre-rendered PNG tiles. See https://docs.protomaps.com/deploy/cost for analysis.
Dynamic maps. The maps can be 'styled' on the fly meaning that we could highlight points-of-interest or hide unimportant data depending on the context that the user is operating in.
maplibre is a branch from mapbox at the point where they changed their licensing. It's probably the most complete and widely used open source map rendering solution. The CPU usage appears to be similar to using pre-rendered maps, though we should keep an eye on this.
Initially we're getting the vector tiles from maptiler, and they are not in protomap format. However, I have tested using protomap as the tile provider and that also works well. The protomap default basemaps don't have the POIs that are available in maptiler so sticking with maptiler until we roll our own.