I think it is actually slightly less bandwidth than now - because the <graph> tag produces an image (from graphoid service), whereas the current map uses an image from commons plus CSS hack to position a dot overlay.

If the graph is interactive and it gets clicked by the user, it would of course consume much more bandwidth - downloading the Vega and d3 libraries as well as all the data needed to recreate the graph on the client side.

On Tue, Dec 8, 2015 at 10:44 PM, T Fish <tfish@guerillero.net> wrote:
Has anyone come up with the extra bandwidth an end user would use if
we did this switch?

On Tue, Dec 8, 2015 at 2:41 PM, Yuri Astrakhan <yastrakhan@wikimedia.org> wrote:
> Federico, thanks, see how this can already be done via the <graph> tag -
> https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T120809#1862004
>
> On Tue, Dec 8, 2015 at 2:17 PM, Federico Leva (Nemo) <nemowiki@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>>
>> I can't believe there isn't a report for this, anyway I filed
>> https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T120809
>>
>> Blocks:
>>     T92535: Exclude {{location map}} images from PageImages
>>     T70008: PDF-related improvements needed at Wikivoyage, especially for
>> dynamic maps
>>     T32702: PDF export extension problem with <div style="position:> and
>> any location templates
>>     T52714: VisualEditor: Location map template does not display correctly
>>     T64572: Media Viewer and location map overlays
>>
>> Nemo
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Maps-l mailing list
>> Maps-l@lists.wikimedia.org
>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/maps-l
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Maps-l mailing list
> Maps-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/maps-l
>

_______________________________________________
Maps-l mailing list
Maps-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/maps-l