I am not sure if downloading all pixels of the map image could be more efficient than taking the boundaries of polygons, only... I found SVG rendering is slower than the current image downloading method, though. I still would give a try to canvas :)
On Aug 21, 6:32 pm, Garthan <[email protected]> wrote: > Vectors need pre-simplification at zoomed out state the same as > rasters do... > tile them similarly and they ought to be smaller and faster to acquire > over > the web... ... they will require more clientside processing for > display but > with modern devices.. that is still less significant than it used to > be > (at least if the browsers had there ummm vector rendering code > up to snuff) > > On Aug 20, 7:24 pm, Artem Sav <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > It is absolutely not guaranteed that vector will be faster than tiles. > > In fact, i think that in a big percentage of cases it will be slower - > > drawing a metro map at 10 zoom for example will need lots of vectors. > > > On Aug 20, 1:04 pm, adszhu <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > I wonder if the current image tile downloading method might be > > > replaced with fetching vector data and rendering it in canvas > > > elements... I assume GIS data (consisting of polygons, linestrings, > > > points and texts) can be handled easily using canvas elements. Even > > > the Earth-plugin might be replaced with this technology, though the > > > current 2D feature is far not the same powerful... > > > I'll give a try to render kml files alone, without maps in the > > > background --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Google Maps API" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Maps-API?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
