Add support for Mapy.cz

Created on 15 December 2023, 9 months ago
Updated 12 January 2024, 8 months ago

Problem/Motivation

Adding support for Czech mapping service Mapy.cz.

Remaining tasks

Will post a MR.

Feature request
Status

Fixed

Version

2.1

Component

Code

Created by

🇨🇿Czech Republic Petr Illek

Live updates comments and jobs are added and updated live.
Sign in to follow issues

Merge Requests

Comments & Activities

  • Issue created by @Petr Illek
  • Status changed to Needs review 9 months ago
  • 🇨🇿Czech Republic Petr Illek

    Hi,
    adding initial MR with the required functionality.

  • Status changed to Needs work 9 months ago
  • 🇩🇰Denmark ressa Copenhagen

    I see two branches, but no MR?

  • Merge request !11Add support for Mapy.cz API v1. → (Merged) created by Petr Illek
  • Status changed to Needs review 9 months ago
  • 🇨🇿Czech Republic Petr Illek

    @ressa
    Sorry for the confusion. MR now ready.

  • 🇩🇰Denmark ressa Copenhagen

    ressa changed the visibility of the branch 3409095-support-mapycz to hidden.

  • 🇩🇰Denmark ressa Copenhagen

    Thanks! ... and I just used the new Allow hiding issue fork branches Fixed feature to hide the extra branch, very nice :)

  • Status changed to Needs work 9 months ago
  • 🇩🇰Denmark ressa Copenhagen

    It works great, thanks @Petr Illek. I did have to create an account to test it, and as part of the process send them an SMS ... Do you know if they offer a (very) limited development API key? It's not so important, but would be nice.

    The "create an account" link looks funny, maybe it was copied from Mapbox, which also looks like it doesn't work? Perhaps you can simply remove target="_access_token both places?

    ... please create an account, <a href="https://developer.mapy.cz/en/rest-api-mapy-cz/api-key/ target="_access_token">generate an access token</a>
    
    ... please create an account, <a href="https://docs.mapbox.com/help/glossary/access-token target="_access_token">generate an access token</a>
    
  • 🇨🇿Czech Republic Petr Illek

    Thanks for the reviewing almost in realtime! Highly appreciated.
    You were right, I copied that piece from the Mapbox snippet. I looked at the others and it was everywhere. So I removed it as it does not make any sense. Not sure if there might by some JS (or other code) somewhere doing something according to the target value??

    I've also done some updates on the Mapy.cz attribution so it should look ok in more situation (now it was in second line thanks to the Olivero styling).

    To answer your question about the dev account. I don't know, but I'll be writing them soon, so I will ask. ;)

  • Status changed to Needs review 9 months ago
  • Status changed to RTBC 9 months ago
  • 🇩🇰Denmark ressa Copenhagen

    You're welcome, and thanks for a fast update and fixing all the links. I agree, it's best to keep it simple. The maps still look great, though I did have to zoom in a lot on a city, to see the difference between Basic and Outdoor, but they are not identical. I didn't notice the Mapy.cz attribution before, but it looks great now.

    Feel free to review these map additions and README update I added recently :)

  • 🇨🇿Czech Republic Petr Illek

    I realize I forgot to update the Readme file.

  • Status changed to Needs work 9 months ago
  • 🇬🇧United Kingdom rachel_norfolk UK

    I admit I might be picky but there appear to be a couple of changes in the MR that are outside the scope of the issue. A couple of changes of double quotes to single ones.

    Now, I happen to agree with the change but it should be in an issue that details that change.

    Could you update the MR to only include in-scope changes and set straight back to RTBC? I’ll then happily merge.

    Ta

  • 🇩🇰Denmark ressa Copenhagen

    @Petr Illek: FYI, I created 📌 [Meta] Release version 2.2 Active , and added this issue to the list as well.

  • Status changed to Needs review 9 months ago
  • 🇨🇿Czech Republic Petr Illek

    Thank you @rachel_norfolk for being picky,
    I've reverted the changes and left there only the one regarding the newly added code.

    A side note – and feel free to point me to a discussion if that was (and I'm sure it was) already being discussed before.
    I must admit I on one hand like the strict approach with doing the code only for what is described in the issue. I understand the need for that as it is easier to do the CR. On the other hand if it is a merely a coding standard fix, does not this approach slow down the overall development?

  • Status changed to Fixed 9 months ago
  • 🇬🇧United Kingdom rachel_norfolk UK

    To be honest, Petr, the pickiness is more about me trying to improve my own practices than anything else. I’ve been quite guilty of proposing (and accepting!) MRs that include more than described.

    Awesome new feature, though - more maps!!! 👏

  • 🇨🇿Czech Republic Petr Illek

    Thank you Rachel!

    🥳

  • Automatically closed - issue fixed for 2 weeks with no activity.

Production build 0.71.5 2024