On Sun, May 15, 2011 at 10:27 PM, Paul Hartmann <phaau...@googlemail.com>wrote:
> The animations are awesome though. On my system, they work in Chrome, but > not in Firefox 3.6 or Opera 11.01 browser. > The zoom animation works on browsers that support CSS3 Transforms and Transitions (e.g. in Chrome, FF4+, Safari, iOS). It's also coming in IE9 & Opera in future versions. > Normally I'd say it is good to have a little competition, but wouldn't it > be so much easier to fork OL and rewrite the parts you don't like? A > "friendly fork" could contribute some code upstream occasionally. If I had to rewrite the parts of OL I don't like I would end up rewriting everything (not to mention how enormous it is in terms of amount of code). Not that there's something really bad about it, it's just has a different vision from mine: development approach, design choices, API, set of features, etc. I guess I need to write a big detailed post about reasons that convinced me to write a library from scratch when I could just use OL - but believe me, they were quite significant. But I'd love to contribute to Polymaps and Modest Maps JS libraries in future - I like them a lot. :) -- Vladimir Agafonkin Front-End Architect, CloudMade +380 93 745 44 61
_______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
