An Offer to the Mobile Mapping Community

The short version:  We're offering to fix a key problem with the open source version of the Mapbox mobile display toolkit.  But it'll cost money.

To emphasize, I'm talking about the native mobile display SDK here, not the web.

The Situation

A lot of discussion is happening around Mapbox closing their Javascript API.  For good reason.  It's the most flexible geospatial display API on the web that focuses on performance.

Less noise has been made about Mapbox doing something similar to their mobile APIs back in July.  Same problem, different platform.

Mapbox Did What Now?

It's a little convoluted, but it goes like this.  They changed the license on the mobile APIs to make it more restrictive, sure, but they also did something more worrying.  They scooped out the rendering engine for Android and iOS and placed it in a binary blob.  So it's no longer open source, or even visible.

Obviously that makes the SDK no longer open.  In a big, big way.  So you can just use the old version, right?  Well, there's a wrinkle.

Apple, OpenGL ES and Metal

The old Mapbox mobile SDKs used OpenGL ES for rendering.  That's fine on Android, but Apple has deprecated OpenGL in favor of its own rendering toolkit, Metal.  The how's and why's and wailing and such is for another day.  They can do it.  They did it.  We live with it.

So that's a big problem using the old (open) version of the Mapbox mobile display SDKs.  You're going to fall off the cliff at some point without a Metal renderer.

So Why Not Switch to WhirlyGlobe-Maply

Honestly, we'd prefer you just took a look at our toolkit.  It has a good open source lineage and we didn't close it when we added Metal support.

But yeah, we know people will want to stick with MapboxGL, even if they can't have the new version.  So what if you could drop in a new Metal renderer?

Who Do We Know With a Metal Renderer?

Well, we have a Metal renderer in WhirlyGlobe-Maply.  It's sitting there in our toolkit purring away.  Tested in shipping software, uses indirect rendering, the more GPU friendly complicated option, and already rendering Mapbox Style Sheets.

So You Just Drop It In Then?

Ever tried to drop a new engine in your car?  Yeah, it's a bit more complex, but it can be done.

Our low level renderer is meant for internal use.  We interact with it through a set of Managers which turn things like roads into polygons and shader controls.  The renderer itself has modules for OpenGL and Metal.

But the good news is that low level piece (WhirlyKit, we call it) is separable.  It's one nice C++ blob that could be copied into another project.

Lawyers, Drugs & Money

I've never looked inside MapboxGL.  I don't know how they implement their shaders, I don't know if they have a true rendering engine or some tile based thing.  I've never looked and I wasn't planning on it.

No disrespect to their work, I just manage our Intellectual Property carefully.  Our solutions will look different from theirs, have a provable audit trail in git and be more likely to stand up in court.

This project would pierce that veil and I'd want to have a good attorney lay out the ground rules.  Good attorneys aren't cheap.

And as for the engineering, this isn't a trivial task and it would require money.  We already give away our toolkit for free and maintaining it uses up our "free" time.  Someone needs to pay for this.

So Maybe Someone Will Just Do This For Free?

Maybe.  It's a good learning experience.  But there's a reason Mapbox buried its rendering engine.  Doing it is hard.  Doing it well is much, much harder.

Not many geospatial developers understand real time rendering.  If you want to use game developers, you need to teach them geospatial.  Been down that road.  It's fine, but it's a long road.

Summary

We know what we're doing here.  Obviously.  We could do this, replacing their OpenGL renderer with our likely faster Metal renderer.  All it takes is money.

I'm not delusional.  A lot of things have to happen quickly.  Any sufficiently large player can find another way to pressure Mapbox and probably already has.  That's just business.

But if you have the cash and the need, we're open to fixing this problem for the community.

Closing of the Mapbox APIs

We make WhirlyGlobe-Maply, a mobile map toolkit that's open source and really fast.  We'd like money to make it better.

The web?  Sure, we'd love to make a Javascript/WebGL version.  Pay us!

And while you're here, do you have any ideas for free marketing?

MapTiler Streets in WhirlyGlobe-Maply

Mapbox & Competition Lost

Let's be honest, Mapbox makes the biggest and best maps SDKs for developers.  Google's map is better, but their SDK is meh.  Apple Maps is pretty good in both ways.  Bing is... also around.  As are lots of others.  But MapboxGL was always our competition.

My vector toolkit predated theirs.  Really!  And I had a few map app developers because of that.  But when they turned on the Softbank money hose, my little toolkit never had a chance.  I lost most of those customers in the ensuing years.  That wasn't fun.

Lucky me, I could see it coming.  I steered the company into weather and aviation.  Unlike a lot of competitors, we survived.

Closed vs. Open Source

Mapbox has changed the license on its mobile and now Javascript APIs to something that is not open source.  Is it free?  I can't really tell.  But it's certainly not open.

I've been expecting this for years.  It's the standard Silicon Valley Venture Capital play.  Make a thing cheap, destroy the competition, enjoy your market.  They executed it well.

So now we're going to get all those customers back, right?  Ha!

Lock In / New Users

The truth is those developers won't ever come back.  The cost of switching is too high and they're off doing other things.  Anyway, if you're using Mapbox services, it's fine.  That strategy totally works.

We have picked up a few open source map extremists in recent years.  They've contributed money to our Vector Tiles and Style Sheet support.  It's getting really good.

So what's next?

We Are Open Source

Let me reiterate that the WhirlyGlobe-Maply toolkit is licensed under Apache 2.0, a very friendly license for doing all sorts of commercial work.

Open source powers our small business and we're committed to it.  It's a contract between us and our community.  One we've honored through several major upgrades.

Javascript / WebGL

And hey, we're open to making a Javascript version of the toolkit.  And not just a cross-compiled version, a real SDK for JS developers.

I've actually proposed this to weather users a few times.  Just the parts they need, overlaid on a web map.  Not the whole thing, but the core rendering is the same.

We'd open source it, because that's who we are.  If you're interested, reach out.  Preferably with money.

Marketing on the Cheap

With less competition, you'd think we'd be set, right?  Not so much.  Mapbox remade the market in its image and we have to live in that world.

But there are opportunities.  Projects that have to switch, projects that are just starting out, competitors who don't want to write their own.  That sort of thing.

So if you have ideas for marketing to those people, I'd love to hear them.  Free ideas, preferably.  Because open source. 

WhirlyGlobe-Maply 3.0 Integration & Housekeeping

There are currently two github repos for WhirlyGlobe-Maply. The main one and the one for version 3.0. We're merging them. 

 Version 3.0 was developed in private for sponsors and then released publicly.  That caused exactly as much trouble as I expected.  We did get Metal support on iOS and a really nice Android version.  Worth it! 

 WhirlyGlobe-Maply Versions

Not everyone wants to upgrade to 3.x right now, so we got you covered on 2.x.

The current 2.x version is 2.6.6.  The tag is v2.6.6 and you can use that directly in Cocoapods or whatever your favorite system may be.  There may be additional v2.6.x versions.  Just look at the tags.

We're going to tag v3.0 on the main repo as well, but you probably want to use 3.1 which we'll be releasing shortly onto master and develop branches.

Going forward, master will be the stable one and use develop if we tell you to (or if you're feeling daring).

Tutorials

I almost forgot.  The tutorials have been updated for 3.0!

Android is new.  Lots of stuff changed on the Android side of things.  iOS has been mostly updated.  If you find problems with either, let us know.

We Can Display Your Mapbox Style Map

When people think of us, most think of WhirlyGlobe.  It's the iconic interface in weather apps like DarkSky and tons of aviation apps you'd only know if you're a pilot.

Saildrone Forecast

But did you know we also make a good 2D slippy map?  That's Maply and it's completely open source.

Our support for Mapbox style maps has gotten really good this year, but we'd like to make it better!

Mapbox Kinda Maps

Vector Tiles and Mapbox Style Sheets are a potent combo and they've won the geospatial format wars.  If you want to make your own vector slippy map, that's likely how you're doing it.

Maply has supported Vector Tiles for years, but the Mapbox Style Sheet support lagged.... until this year.

MapTiler Streets

With the recent move to a unified code base we've got one single Mapbox Style Sheet implementation for iOS and Android.... and wherever else we port to.  On iOS we upgraded our shaders to react to zoom level changes and it looks fantastic.

But there's a lot more to do.  The spec if vast, and the fiddly bits are so very fiddly.  We need money for more.

Who Are You Again?

mousebird consulting is a little company that makes WhirlyGlobe-Maply.  We specialize in weather, aviation, and GIS mobile app development based on the toolkit.

We've been around with this thing for nearly a decade.  It actually predates most of the competition... and it really is open source.

How Much Money We Talking?

Mapbox Style Sheet support is vast and will absorb a lot of development money.  Two platforms with two graphics APIs (Metal and OpenGL ES) make it more complex.  But architecturally, things are good and money will translate directly to features.

As for amounts, $150k means I can hire someone just for this.  $30k means we spend a couple of sprints on new features.  Obviously more is better, but even $10k would move things along.

I Dunno, We're Kind of Invested In...

Oh, I know you are.  Maybe you'll consider switching someday, but that's not what this is about.  

Some very large companies are committed to this technology.  Toss us a little cash and we'll be there as your backup plan.

And for the rest of you, our toolkit has gotten really good and we've outlived most of our competitors.  We're stable and we're not going anywhere.  If you're committed to open source, check us out.

Elevation / Synthetic Vision

I’ve never been happy with elevation support in the toolkit.  With the move to 3.0 and advances in mobile hardware, we can do much better.

But before I dive in, a bit about terminology.  Aviation developers tend to refer to a simulated display of where a pilot is and where they're going as Synthetic Vision.  The rest of you might just think of it as elevation support in the toolkit.  It's the same thing.

Mt. Rainier from Mapbox Satellite with elevation

I’m going to try to put together a small group of WhirlyGlobe-Maply users to sponsor a new development effort.  Let’s look at what that would be.

How Loading Used to Work

Level 0 loaded

Elevation loading was something of a hack in the toolkit.  To understand why, we have to look at the way we loaded a tile’s worth of data:

  Can we see enough of this tile to load it?

  Request the imagery & wait for it to return

  Request the elevation & wait for it to return

  Build the geometry

  Slap them all together

The biggest problem was loading time.  The visuals would get super chunky as users waited for things to load.  And it was all serial.  Wait for imagery, then wait for elevation.  Not great.

How Loading Works Now

With the move to the Sampler/Loader architecture in 3.0 things got a lot better.  The tile loading process now looks like this.
  Can we see enough of this tile to load it?
  Rebuild the geometry immediately.
  Slap whatever we currently have on the tile
  Request the image

As new images come in, we update the connection between geometry and textures so things get sharper.  Best of all, the user sees the geometry immediately.  It never gets blocky.  The figures above are level 0 for the Stamen Watercolor tiles (right) even though we’re at level 4 or so for the geometry (left).

Saildrone Forecast uses a hybrid vector map on a globe

We can also do cool stuff like load a whole stack of data sources and merge them together to produce an image and maybe some vector data and the system just manages it all.  And it’s smart enough to request everything it needs at once, rather than feeling its way down from the top.  It’s really nice.

Elevation could be a simple part of that, but I had something much bigger in mind.

How Elevation Should Work

Now we’ve got a pool of imagery tiles controlled by what the system thinks is visible.  It can be laggy, imagery can be missing, we can tolerate sources with varying levels.  It’s much more flexible.  This suggests a way forward for elevation.

But let’s detour briefly into how we draw stuff.  This is what the geometry goes through.

Super complex diagram of the render pipeline

The geometry tiles point at the best imagery tiles (or sub-sections) for their use.    Imagery becomes textures in OpenGL (or Metal) and these are applied in the fragment shader stage.  It’s all well greased for just this use case.

On the left, you can see the tiles that are loaded, including level 0 and level 5(ish) for the given (white) viewing area.  On the right, that’s what it looks like.  To capture this picture, you have to take a video of the system while you zoom out very quickly.  It will catch up and delete the high res tiles very quickly.

The idea here is that geometry tiles will point at the best imagery they can find currently loaded.

For elevation, we actually need to do the work before the fragment shader.  Each piece of geometry needs to get its spatial location before it can move on to the next stage.  We used to do this on the CPU, but now we could do it in a vertex shader, on the GPU.

It’s good to do things on the GPU.  Mostly.  In general.  But specifically, in this case.  If we pick up the elevation right at the beginning of rendering, we can do a lot of interesting stuff with it.

Geometry Tile Points to Elevation and Imagery Pools

Each geometry tile would point to the best elevation data available to it.  That might be the right tile or it might be a subset of a lower resolution tile.  Just like with imagery.

Now we’d have two pools of data, one for imagery and one for elevation.  They’d be loaded independently and they could be different resolutions, loaded at different rates.

Having the elevation living in a separate pool of data opens up another possibility:  We can mess with it.

Elevation Overlays

One big problem with synthetic vision and elevation is airports.  Runways are flat(ish), but the elevation data may not be, particularly at the resolutions available.  What we need is a way to flatten the elevation.

Elevation + Runway = Flattened Elevation

I would propose adding an overlay at a high resolution.  We render the airport outlines into that overlay with a bit of a buffer and ask the geometry vertex shader to do the heavy lifting.  And yes, runways slope, but I’m trying to keep the explanation simple.

The geometry vertex shader would read from the regular elevation and the overlay.  No overlay, it just does the regular thing.  With the overlay, it has a couple options.  Within the runway itself, calculate a specific elevation.  In the buffer zone, interpolate between the target elevation and the elevation database.  That’ll be easy on the eyes.

As far as data representation goes, this is wonderfully simple.  Elevation data is just a set of grids, loosely corresponding to the imagery.  Airports (or runways) are simple polygons.  All we need is a bit of spatial information in a simple database for lookup.

Best of all, it’s pretty easy to update.  But there are some details.

Point Model Placement

There are a number of objects you want to sit on the terrain.  These are things like towers, poles, maybe even buildings.

Objects sitting on top of terrain

Those will also need to be tied to the elevation database and do their position lookups in a vertex shader.  It’s the same process as geometry tiles for the visuals, but it’s a toolkit change and will require a bit of work.

3D Loading Details

Tiles with St. Helens take up more screen space

Another problem is how we load 3D data tiles versus 2D.

In general, we don’t take the elevation into account when loading tiles.  And because we don’t, you end up loading more than you should just in case.

Taking elevation into account requires a fair bit of feedback between the loading system and the data it’s loading.  The short version is, we need the bottom and top of the tile, but we don’t have it until we’ve loaded it.  Fixable, but a bit of work.

Airport/Runway Generator

The toolkit has a facility for generating geometry on the fly, but it doesn’t know anything about runways.

I’d propose building a rudimentary runway generator based on simple data.  Markers, numbers, direction, that sort of thing.  It’ll likely work well enough for most use cases and provide endless opportunities for developers to improve on.

Elevation Database

I’d leave the actual airport databases up to the developers.  But for the elevation, there’s no reason to reinvent the wheel.

I propose to build a new elevation database for CONUS and possibly Alaska.  Worldwide would be a possibility, but I’m guessing it’s less useful.

I’d use standard data sources, available for free (USGS, mostly).  Resolution would be determined by available data, but probably not better than 10m and possibly as low as 30m.

The resulting database would be MBTiles-like Sqlite and lower resolution versions could be easily harvested.  It’s pretty easy simple a handful of SQL calls.

I’ve done this before, so I’ll also update the open source tools I used in the past and provide instructions for doing it again.

Conclusion

With a good set of imagery this would look fantastic.  Even without the imagery, it’ll be pretty useful.  Since the data is fairly lightly processed, you’d be able to mix and match to your own requirements or what customers are willing to pay for.  It’ll work paging over the network or with everything local to the device.

This is where I want to take elevation in WhirlyGlobe-Maply.  What are your priorities and what requirements do you have?  Drop me a line.  And money.  Money is always good.

Vector Features / Mapbox Style Sheet Roadmap

Mapbox Style Sheet support has been ported to Android!  Look for it in 3.1.

But this post is really about vector features and money.  Let's dive in.

Vector Maps

You know what vector maps are.  Take some points, lines, and polygons and turn them into visual maps.

Let's start with source data which is maybe GeoPackage or ShapeFiles, sometimes Mapbox Vector Tiles or even your own weird format.  Then style it.  Maybe you use SLD or Mapbox's Style Spec.  Some people have their own formats and a lot just do it in code.  That's how you get visuals from data.

This requires some basic vector functionality in the WhirlyGlobe-Maply toolkit.  Stuff like labels, wide lines, big polygon features, texture support.  You know the drill if you're using the toolkit.

I'd like to make that all work better.

Who This is For

Are you using WG-Maply in your aviation app?  Then I know you'd like better vector support.  This is for you.

Are you using the Mapbox Styles in your map or weather app?  Then this is definitely for you.  All of these features will benefit the Mapbox style maps.

With WG-Maply 3.0 released and working, now is the time to add a whole bunch of cross-platform vector features.  What follows is a menu of things that can be added to the toolkit.   For money.

Zoom Level

What zoom level is this is one of the fundamental questions in laying out a flat map.  Alas, our maps are not flat and it’s a much more complicated question than it seems.  Check out this spherical mercator map splatted on the globe.

What zoom level are we at?  Well…. it’s complicated.  That particular map might be a zoom level 6.  But if we head north, without changing our elevation we’re quickly going to be at zoom level 5.  Why?  Because the tiles get much smaller.

But a lot of things depend on a continuous “zoom level”.  A color might trigger at zoom 2.5.  Text size might interpolate between zoom levels 1-5 continuously.

To fix this once and for all I’ll implement a continuous zoom level for a given data source.  It’ll be an object you can pass around for reference and query yourself as needed.  I’ll even smooth out the nonlinearities (with some deeply strange code it’s best not to think about).

With a dependable zoom level calculation we use on specific features a lot of other things get easier.

Wide Vectors

Wide Vectors are just linear features with width and proper junctions.  We have a wide vector implementation, but it’s got problems: It’s old and leans on geometry to do things it could do in the shaders and it’s missing a bunch of features.

Some of the basic attributes should vary by zoom level including width, color, opacity and offset.

Offset is a big one we don't have now.  It would let you do insets and borders around polygons.  I know you aviation users want this one, because you keep asking for it.

All the standard junction and cap types need to be supported.  We just do bevel right now.

https://www.w3.org/TR/SVG/painting.html#StrokeLinejoinProperty

We have some facility for dots and dashes, but those need to be updated and tested properly.  Much of this logic just needs to go into a more intelligent shader.

Polygons

Big polygonal features mostly work just fine.  All that's really missing is control of color, opacity and enabling based on zoom level.

Fill patterns with textures could use some work as well.

Text

Text support gets tricky, particular with two platforms.  It does work, but we need even more.  Ignoring layout for the moment there are other features we need.

As with lines and polygons, we should be able to vary color, opacity and size continuously on zoom level.

Right now outlines are kind of blurry.  Ignoring the low level details of why, this is fixable.

And here's a specific Mapbox Style Spec feature:  Support for their wacky font packs.  I'm not going to switch entirely over to those, but for one of their maps it would be nice to just use them.

Layout

Here's the really big feature for layout.  Making labels follow lines.  That one would be huge.  It'll also be a lot of work.  Again, looking at the aviation users here.  I know you want this.

But general Mapbox Style Sheet users would like this too.

Screen Objects

We have markers in the toolkit and we've got text.  So if you want to make a highway shield or something you can just stick one on top of the other, right?

Yeah, kinda.  It'll work until you see those features intersecting each other and then it looks weird.  This happens a lot with aviation symbols.

One solution is to make custom markers for everything, which people do, but it tends to get messy and complex to adjudicate.

Screen Objects fix that problem.  You just tell the system you'd like a highway symbol overlaid with a bit of text and it'll make that happen for you.  And, oh yeah, that'll work will with part of the Mapbox Style Spec.

Mapbox Specific Features

Up to this point we're looking at general purpose WG-Maply features.  Things you can use without committing to their style spec.  But there a few specifics that'd be great if you are using their style sheets.

Sprite Sheets

There's some support for this in the toolkit, specifically on iOS.  It just needs to be hooked up and tested properly.

Mapbox Font Madness

I don't love how they implemented fonts.  It seems a bit extravagant to me.  But if you want it and you're willing to pay for it, then sure.  It would simplify loading the standard Maptiler styles quite a lot.

Layout Specifics

How they do layout and how I do layout are pretty different.  There are lots of niggling little specifics in their spec that I'm likely to just ignore.  If you want to get closer to pixel perfection with their maps, I'm game.  You know.  For money.

Hillshades, Heatmaps, Fake 3D & Rasters

If you're using some of this crazy stuff in the style spec, you're probably just using MapboxGL (whatever it's called now).  I have other ways of doing it which are more code based.  But if you want to, then sure.  Again.  For money.

Conclusion

Odds are you're reading this because I sent you here with the request "I'd like some money to add several of these features I know you want".  So, you know, let's do that.  There's efficiency in scale and the more time I spend on vector maps, the better they will get.

For everyone else, this is where I'd like to take the vector map support in WG-Maply.  Your feedback is welcome too.