Open nielsbom opened 5 months ago
Alex Russel has written a great deal on frontend performance and how it has created and continues to create inequality.
It would be great if @queeringthemap (Lucas) could share some data on the types of devices visiting QtM. Do you have that info Lucas?
Beyond that, there's a question of if the thousand of points is actually much of a performance issue. We haven't done any quantification of that, so at this point, we don't know if it's a bottleneck.
What attributes of "having all points rendered on the map" are (most) important?
What devices do we want people to be able to use QTM on?
On what kind of internet connection do we want users to still be able to reasonably use QTM?
losing a few of the outliers
We can display pins (or leave them out) based on how densely they are spaced. That means we don't have to lose any outliers, just dropping pins from within dense areas like cities.
As I see it, this issue has two concerns: one about what are the appropriate benchmarks to use for developing QtM and another about how to visualise so many points.
I propose we keep this issue focused on benchmarking and move discussions of the ways to visualise so many points to this issue https://github.com/radical-data/queering-the-map/issues/9. I'll copy the relevant points across there.
(Somewhat related to #5 )
@jokroese told me there's a (strong?) preference for having all actual points rendered on the map, even when zoomed out.
I'd like to ask some questions about this and also approach this from a (performance) accessibility perspective. This kind of accessibility considers the technology that people use to access the site, so mostly their computing device and their internet connection.
(I do think other kinds of accessibility are equally important btw)
An assumption I have is that we prefer it if more people can use the the site, than less.
What attributes of "having all points rendered on the map" are (most) important?
What devices do we want people to be able to use QTM on?
On what kind of internet connection do we want users to still be able to reasonably use QTM?
Suggestion
Once there's a baseline performance budget wrt device and internet connection we can (and imho should) start testing QTM with that budget in mind.