I agree with this. Particularly Rust compiled to WebAssembly look very promising for building applications like an editor. Rust is fast and safe and it already has multiple OSM related crates. See here for an example: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YHJjmsw_Sx0
An editor written in Rust and compiled to WebAssembly would probably be a lot faster than iD is today. Writing something completely in browser JS these days is not the best way forward if speed and portability is is important iMO. Alexandre Oliveira <rockyt...@gmail.com> skrev: (2 augusti 2020 19:01:23 CEST) >I'd like to share my two cents on the matter of supporting Potlatch 2, >an editor built with (now) dead technology. > >I don't think it's worth spending money to update P2 to Air. As others >have stated, Air has been discontinued as well, and it was developed >by Adobe, probably with the same amount of security flaws as Flash >had, which contributed to its demise. I don't see Air as different >even though it's being maintained now by Samsung. > >Just take a look. The web is different than when P2 released; flash is >deprecated and a synonym for vulnerable systems, Air tried to take off >but now it's just another dead technology. What are the benefits of >porting P2 to Air? It may be easier because Air may share some code >with Flash, which in turn makes it easier to port to. > >However, I think that the OSMF should find someone familiar with Flash >and look forward to porting P2 to modern web technologies (please not >Electron!), like WebAssembly or Web 2.0. Be it JavaScript, >CoffeeScript or TypeScript, React, Angular, Vue.js or any other modern >web tech, it doesn't matter. I think it's going to be money well spent >if P2 was ported to a supported web technology and not something that >died a few years ago and is on life support, and barely anyone uses it >nowadays. > >IMO porting P2 to Air is just a waste of money and time from the >developer, and we will reach the same point in the future, be it >either for deprecating P2 or looking to port it to newer web >technologies. OSMF should prepare for the future and not continue >using deprecated technology. > >_______________________________________________ >talk mailing list >talk@openstreetmap.org >https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
_______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
