[Mapcss] Development of MapCSS?

Paul Hartmann phaaurlt at googlemail.com
Fri Mar 8 22:16:58 UTC 2013

On 03/04/2013 08:06 PM, Andrew Shadura wrote:
> Hello,
> On Mon, 4 Mar 2013 11:04:48 +0100
> Martin Vonwald <imagic.osm at gmail.com> wrote:
>> But now I'm curious how MapCSS will further develop. If each MapCSS
>> renderer implements extensions on its own I'm afraid it will lead to
>> JOSM-MapCSS, Halcyon-MapCSS, Potlatch-MapCSS, ... and we will end up
>> with a lot of incompatible style sheets. This reminds me of the
>> internet just a few years ago and (I think I can speak for the
>> majority here) we definitively don't want to go back there.
> Well, I haven't been involved in MapCSS development lately, but took
> some part in the beginning of 0.2 and helped to develop it, and one of
> its parsers, now unused unfortunately.
> I'm not particularly happy with what's happening with MapCSS. It's
> understandable when certain software doesn't implement some features,
> as sometimes there may be technical or other obstacles for that. When
> features are implemented a very different way, or implemented without
> priop discussions, this leads to chaos. And that's what we have now.
> In my opinion, JOSM implements MapCSS in a very bad way, and its
> extensions are extremly non-systematic and against the spirit of
> CSS-like languages at all and MapCSS in particular. Function naming
> is very strange and is not easily readable.

I'm a bit surprised by your strong disapproval. Extensions have been 
implemented because there was demand for these features. If you have 
ideas to achieve the same with a better syntax, then please let me know. 
You can also suggest better function names, it shouldn't be a problem to 
add an alias and deprecate the old name.

In my opinion, MapCSS support in JOSM has been a great success so far. 
We have about 40 MapCSS styles contributed and maintained by users. Some 
of these styles are quite comprehensive and extremely useful (like the 
one by Martin).

I'd be happy to join the discussion and work towards a unification of 
the language. However there seems to be little direct and practical 
benefit from this. If there was another MapCSS renderer that was 
interested in using the JOSM tailored styles, then some discussion would 
be starting. But for one reason or another, there isn't much exchange 
and sharing of styles at the moment. (Well, JOSM ships the main PL2 
style. :) )


More information about the Mapcss mailing list