Since Cycles supports multi UVmap for material I have a question:
Why it’s used as separate node?
Isn’t it more logical leave it under texture coordinate node and keep Input list easier to read?
Second question:
blender 2.49 supports choose another object as coordinator for texture.
Is there any difficulties to have it for Cycles too?
Thanks for your opinion.
Nice proposal !
Using an other object as coordinator for texture is a much needed feature for Cycles, that would be awesome to have it back from the internal !
This is a really solid proposal. It makes more sense to put the UVMap selection on the same node, and using a separate object’s texture coordinates is really useful for animation. I think there’s a way to do it with the “Attribute” node, but it’s not intuitive or convenient.
+1 from me!
Maybe to make it easier for newcomers to find how to apply an image a different UV texture. It isn’t clear that the “Attribute” node can do this, and the “Texture Coordinate” is a little obscure (as a name, when you see it in the menu).
Then the “UV Map” node is really for all that is UV related, for instance an option to ensure UV project is correct (to be used alongside the UV project modifier) shall be added to it at some point in the future. In that respect, we shouldn’t make the “Texture Coordinate” node too busy.
I like the proposal. Going to look into what it would take to implement, might be really simple.
Interesting, that simplifies things a lot.
Cycles need Stress coordinates too before it is called “Features Complete”
Thank you for feedback.
@KWD: Attribute is not intuitive, I m happy for this direct function, but why to create separate node since there exists node with whole other coord.
I red somewhere, that UV node will have more features in a future (like now I see UV along stroke node used for Freestyle), but even more from this point of view Input menu should be organised.
To don’t make a node too busy in a future there are other options, maybe this one that follow like Math node system.
I think “Input” menu list is even now too long. So why to make it longer.
To find what you are looking for would be so hard.
Name “Texture Coord” is ok for me. It has to do with texture and position.
@m9105826: thank you for help 
@Hikaru Ai: +1
I really like this last idea, it reduces the clutter and is extremely intuitive! Great suggestion, I hope this can be implemented:)
I don’t like it. Actualy, you can give different coordinates to several textures using one Texture Coordinates node.
With this design, you have to create one node per mapping.
With Node Wrangler addon enabled, you have already the same list with a lazy mouse connection. It is not less readable.
And when conection is done, you can use Ctrl H to limit display of node to useful info. It has the same look.
But I agree with the idea of supppression of UVmap node. A node to correct, add option to an UVmap could be plugged to Texture Coordinates node socket.
Probably, to keep the node readable naming fields and corresponding socket should be put at the end of the list like for BI’s Geometry node.
Why not just add an ‘attribute type’ menu to the attribute node and have the RNA system work its magic in listing what is available.
So the types right now would be ‘vertex color’, ‘UVmap’, and ‘voxel’, and it wouldn’t negatively impact usability since you just use one attribute index per-node anyway.
I’m sure you already know, but good news!
@zeauro: Yes I agree with you … I noticed that later.
The second thing -to place field at a bottom of node like BI Geometry - that is what is current situation and I’m not too happy with it.
It doubles a list and make UI a bit messy, with my first proposal it seems to me more clear and simpler.
As you can read in the link (that SterlingRoth wrote), sergey answered is “It’s not currently possible to do layout like this.”
I had no time to ask him (in correct place) what exactly is not possible to do.
@Ace Dragon: sounds quite good, from a users perspective I’m not sure how intuitive it would be (I can’t imagine all situations at the moment, so lets think about it.)
@SterlingRoth: thanks for the link, yeah I already noticed at the same day (I saw it in some video I think), but thank you anyway for your attention 
for Second question:
blender 2.49 supports choose another object as coordinator for texture.
first idea would be nicer then what we have now
for second part
thought this already exist in cycles ?
but not easy to find and use !
adding it directly in the texture coordi node would make it faster and easier to use!
happy cl
Where is in official releases?