Somebody asked me what this is for and I gave them the technical answer: I wanted to know whether a browser tab could hold a photograph of a real place and let you drive around inside it. That is a fine reason to start building something and a poor reason for anyone else to be interested.

The honest position is that I do not know which use is the real one. What I can do is write the candidates down so they can be argued with instead of implied, which is what the use-cases page now is. There are four.

A test drive on a street that exists. Car makers put configurators on the web and the last step is always a rendering, usually on a road nobody has driven. The street is the part that is hard to fake and the part that decides how a car feels.

Walking a place before you go to it. A venue before you fly out, a hotel before you book, a building before it is built. Photographs and floor plans both leave out the same thing, which is what it is like to stand in it and turn around.

Driving a route before anyone books it. A village lane reads differently at eye level than it does on a map, and the difference is most of what a trip is.

Real places dropped into a game. This is the one people assume first and the one I am least sure about, because a game wants a place authored for play and a scan is authored for nothing.

None of those are customers. They are hypotheses with a page of their own now, which is a low bar and still a higher one than keeping them in my head.

What pushed me to write it was noticing that the site described a technique rather than a use. Somebody landing on it could work out what it was and not what it was for, and that is a failure of the site rather than of the thing.