Mercator already did compromise on area and length to have "rhumb lines" (used for navigation, but also direction finding) be straight.

Other map projections (we have hundreds!) compromise on other things to improve on others. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Map_projections

So yes, we definitely NEED compromise and not some strongman that says, due to limited knowledge "it is how it is, forever".

To say that "the world agreed" on something based on a General Assembly resolution is an interesting claim, if rather bold.

UNGA votes are non binding symbolic grandstanding. This vote does not mean the world agreed to it. its more like the world agreed to think about it.

Will countries actually change their map projections? That has yet to be seen. Maybe they will, maybe they won't That has yet to be seen.

Representing a 3D sphere-like surface on a 2d plane definitionally requires compromise.

Somebody who does not represent anybody "agreed" - not us.

One can still note a poor decision based on its merits.

An equal area projection map is obviously valuable. But it's practically asinine to pick a projection that distorts land features when there are several equal area projections that do not.

Further, Ukraine had to abstain from this vote because they shoehorned in something ridiculous considering the official position of the UN members that Crimea is Ukraine [1], and Crimea is depicted as outside of Ukraine.

I have no idea if there are other hidden yet important changes, since there is hardly any commentary apart from size and shape.

[1] https://ukraine-war-analytics.com/history/international-reco...

"The world" is not represented by the UN General Assembly. Did you vote for your representative?