the marble (map) replacement dilemma

Lubomir I. Ivanov neolit123 at gmail.com
Tue Jul 11 11:12:31 PDT 2017


On 11 July 2017 at 20:58, Linus Torvalds <torvalds at linux-foundation.org> wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 11, 2017 at 10:48 AM, Lubomir I. Ivanov <neolit123 at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>
>> but the ESRI implementation inside QtLocation supports offline mode.
>
> The ESRI data seems good enough. It did sound like you had worries
> about the actual implementation?
>

i have at least one Qt Location API question related to the markers,
but currently i'm using a workaround and it seems to work OK.

>> so Marble seems to have the best of both worlds for now - google tiles
>> and offline support.
>
> Yeah, but Marble has been a big painpoint too. So practicalities of
> actually implementing this and maintaining it should be pretty high.
>
> One thing that would be good - and that Marble doesn't do all that
> well - is to have better integration with the outside world. For
> example, I've occasionally wanted a "escape to real google maps" just
> for things like location sharing (and you mentioned streetview earlier
> - not an issue when you're on a reef in palau, but it *is* a potential
> issue when you're looking at the parking lot of a shore-dive).
>
> So Marble has its good sides, but it has certainly its own share of
> painpoints too.
>

Qt Location does not support street view, so i guess that if we decide
to go with the Qt Location solution we need to enable opening street
view inside a new browser window, which runs google maps and requires
internet access - e.g. when clicked a marker on the Qt Location map we
can show a button "street view for this location".

lubomir
--


More information about the subsurface mailing list