Skip to content
Browse files

Add notes from today's pairing with tincho.

  • Loading branch information...
schmonz committed Apr 25, 2018
1 parent f3e0806 commit 486e53ee269b566b8b042572d1a00f1da99b3369
Showing with 40 additions and 0 deletions.
  1. +40 −0 doc/plugins/osm/discussion.mdwn
@@ -23,3 +23,43 @@ For usability it would be great if it was possible to display the active waypoin
*PS. The osm plugin is amazing!*

> Thanks! --[[anarcat]]

## Updated plugin needs review and merge

[[!template id=gitbranch branch=tincho-osm author="[[tincho]]"]]

[[schmonz]] here. I recently tried to use this plugin, had some trouble, and discovered on IRC that [[tincho]] has a largely [rewritten version]( that looks good [on his site](, but hadn't gotten around to submitting for merge. So we remote-paired on it today, improved a few things, and wrote down what we noticed:

### Features removed

- Google Maps API
- Multiple layers
- Customized waypoint icons
- Full-screen map (via the CGI)
- Whatever "editable" did (maybe something interactive?)
- OpenLayers -> Leaflet (if anyone was somehow depending on OpenLayers)

### Features added

- Maps actually work again
- Maps work when embedded in HTTPS sites
- Multiple maps and multiple waypoints in a page probably work better now
- Maps _do_ appear in inlines
- Pagestate hash gets cleaned up better after edit/preview/delete

### Wishlist

- Optionally do something (render a static image?) for RSS
- When drawing lines between waypoints that are linked, optionally draw an arrow
- Performance/ikiwiki-idiomaticness: generate one GeoJSON file per waypoint, then rely on getting changed waypoints from the `changes()` hook
- Treat optional waypoint description as Markdown (or whatever input format you're using)
- Simplify scrubbing (maybe avoid needing HTML::Scrubber)

### Questions for reviewers

- Given this is backward-incompatible, dhould we call it something other than "osm"?
- What needs scrubbing? Have we covered all the bases? Too many bases?
- Should we vendor Leaflet into an underlay, instead of needing a URL to load it from a CDN? [[schmonz]] somewhat prefers this, so we avoid needing external resources by default, avoid breaking when the Leaflet CDN is down, etc.
- Should we write some tests before merging? `` hadn't had any, FWIW

0 comments on commit 486e53e

Please sign in to comment.
You can’t perform that action at this time.