>> Or `@layers = ( 'OSM' );`. --[[anarcat]]
+>>> Yeah, and then `layers => [@layers]` or `layers => \@layers`
+>>> to turn it into a reference when building `%options`. --s
+
> + @layers = [ split(/,/, $params{layers}) ];
>
> Is comma-separated the best fit here? Would whitespace, or whitespace and/or
> commas, work better?
->> Why don't we simply keep it an array as it already is? I fail to see the reason behind that change. This is the config I use right now on http://reseaulibre.ca/:
+>> Why don't we simply keep it an array as it already is? I fail to see the reason behind that change.
+>>
+>>> This seems to be at least partially a feature request for \[[!osm]]:
+>>> "allow individual \[[!osm]] maps to override `$config{osm_layers}`.
+>>> Items in `%config` can be a reference to an array, so that's fine.
+>>> However, parameters to a [[ikiwiki/directive]] cannot be an array,
+>>> so for the directive, we need a syntax for taking a scalar parameter
+>>> and splitting it into an array - comma-separated, whitespace-separated,
+>>> whatever. --s
+>>
+>> This is the config I use right now on http://reseaulibre.ca/:
>>
>> ~~~~
>> osm_layers:
>> That is an accurate statement.
>>
>> This is old code, so my memory may be cold, but i think that the "layers" parameters used to be a hash, not an array, until two years ago (commit 636e04a). The javascript code certainly expects an array right now. --[[anarcat]]
+
+>>> OK, then I think this might be a mixture of a bug and a feature request:
+>>>
+>>> * bug: the configuration suggested by the example (or the default when
+>>> unconfigured, or something) produces "TypeError: mapProjection is null"
+>>>
+>>> * feature request: per-\[[!osm]] configuration to complement the
+>>> per-wiki configuration
+>>>
+>>> --s
+>>>
+>>>> That is correct. --[[anarcat]]