On Wed, Jan 21, 2009 at 10:43:16AM -0600, Erik Uzureau wrote: > I came across the following quote in a blog entry today: > > "The initial implementation I was working with utilized > OpenLayers<http://openlayers.org/>, > ... Unfortunately the size of the library seems to be constantly increasing > (~200K in the last year) and currently weighs in at 560K uncompressed ... " > [1]
It looks like the place you found that is a spam aggregator, reblogging URLs to gain traffic; or at least someone who is improperly crediting their source. The original of this article is available at: http://blog.kapilt.com/2008/11/30/sharing-large-images-openlayers-gsiv-modestmaps-deepzoom-and-python/ "OpenLayers supports custom build profiles including only the pieces you care about. A simple map â just dragging and WMS tiles â clocks in at about 110k â and has been within 20% of that for most of the 2.x series (now two years running). Information on using the build tools to build your own build are available at http://trac.openlayers.org/wiki/Profiles . Once you take the 110k and run it through gzip, youâre down to ~25k â not that much larger than the binary ModestMaps builds that I checked out (which clocked in at 18kb, but didnât compress much/at all with gzip)." So, compared to a simple Flash implementation, with none of the hooks/bells/whistles that OL has, we're about 30% larger, once you get d own to brass tacks. At that point, you're smaller than a single map tile from just about any mapping service difference, so compressing the library itself much further doesn't gain you much. Regards, -- Christopher Schmidt MetaCarta _______________________________________________ Dev mailing list [email protected] http://openlayers.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
