Good!
Vector maps were always an obvious choice, and SVGs have been available for 25 yrs, what I don’t get is why raster became the fashion? Is it related to evolution of client-side processing power?

Vector tiles represent a significant advancement in how map data is processed and presented. Unlike traditional raster tiles, which are static images with pixels, vector tiles are like the ‘SVGs’ of the mapping world: you get lines and points. This stores geodata in a format that allows for dynamic styling and interactivity, enabling the user to adapt the visual appearance of the map without altering the data. If that sounds like what you’ve seen on other maps, you are right! Vector tiles have become industry standard in interactive maps that, unlike openstreetmap.org, don’t get updated often, and where you can simply recalculate your whole database occasionally.

I still don’t understand the difference between raster tiles and vector tiles. Can someone ELI5? How does a map with vector tiles look different to a map with raster tiles?

Raster is better for contiguous areas really, lossy compression can be helpful!

Think height maps, climatology datasets, coasts/land/rivers, deltas/swamps etc

Vector data and tiles make soo much more sense though for 99% of OSM, kudos on the switch. Will we also see a switch to maplibre I wonder? Or more compatible I do suppose

I am excited by this.

Congrats to @pnorman@en.osm.town

huge

This sounds huge for OSM.org’s usability, but does it affect anything downstream?