It's all very well to talk about interactive maps, but in my view there is also a continuing role for static maps -- eg, maps for each of the four types that we have a property for on Wikidata
These are all useful -- and in particular, can be useful to offer as images on Commons, that people can find and use for other purposes (Commons and Wikidata are here to provide content for the whole world, not just for Wikipedia).
It seems to me for many uses the maps do not need to be dynamic. But instead it may be valuable to make sure they are re-generated every 12 months, or every 3 months, or as triggered by an editor, eg to show a new motorway that may have been opened.
I am particularly dubious of the idea that seems to be prevalent in the RfC page of trying to fit everything into a "one size fits all purposes" single mould. Instead I think there is a value for continuing to offer P242-style maps, and P1943-style maps, and not P1621-style map to create everything.
An important part of the P242 and P1943 maps are the inset maps found in corners. A simple macro language should be found, to specify the design of the main map with any inset maps, to allow them in turn to be easily regenerated and updated.
Summary of Wikidata map properties below from d:Template:Map property comparison:
|locator map image (P242) is a map suitable for an infobox for the item itself, showing where an entity is located in a wider area||location map (P1943) is a largely blank map, suitable for a push-pin to be added in an infobox for a place within the item -- the most major roads, railways and rivers are marked, but not the details of most settlements.||detail map (P1621) is for a detailed map or plan of the item, which is probably already too 'busy' to allow further annotation||relief location map (P1944) for a relief variant of the location map|
Other specific map types might be added -- eg maps to show precipitation catchment area of river systems.