So the problems this article brings up about the Google Mercator projection have been solved? Do you have any links to more readings about the issues?
>"We have reviewed the coordinate reference system used by Microsoft, Google, etc. and believe that it is technically flawed. We will not devalue the EPSG dataset by including such inappropriate geodesy and cartography."
Well if I still use the Web Mercator I'm still going to have widely inaccurate feature rendering between zoom levels. Thank you for trying, I guess I should be asking these questions in GIS forums instead.
The zoom level bug you are hung up on was due to the way web mercator was implemented in Osmarender. This is why people are answering your concerns about teh zooming by pointing out osmarender is no longer used.
So no, don't use web mercator for analysis. But only worry about inconsistent rendering across zoom levels if you are using Osmarender.
Thank you!! Yeah I've never used OSM render, it is just the only place I had been able to find discussion about the inaccuracies of the projection. It also exists in all online slippy maps I've used from the latest OpenLayers to the latest Google Maps. Thanks again!
The features don't change between zoom levels. They will be displayed the same. The bug you're referring to is with a piece of software that isn't been used any more.
All projection systems have "inaccuracies". It has literally been mathematically proven ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theorema_Egregium ). Never the less, GIS people can, and do, use many projections professionally.
Thank you, I know you're trying to help, but this issue as the other commenter replied is not one due to inaccuracies of projections per se, but specifically the method by which layers are divided for use in web page interfaces.
>"We have reviewed the coordinate reference system used by Microsoft, Google, etc. and believe that it is technically flawed. We will not devalue the EPSG dataset by including such inappropriate geodesy and cartography."