Select a Region Below
Visits:
davidhowland14 1199068956|%e %b %Y, %H:%M %Z|agohover
The way I've made my maps so far, I unchecked the trail boundaries so they are not visible. This leaves the acreage data still available, but the view of the resort is much less cluttered and much easier to see. Also, what are we going to do with this page: http://geosap.wikidot.com/guide-to-mapping-ski-areas
I think that information from both pages is valuable, and having both is redundant.
davidhowland14 1199069982|%e %b %Y, %H:%M %Z|agohover
I updated the page with some of my stuff from the previous page. We need to decide if we want the trail boundaries visible or not visible. My vote goes to not visible (unchecked in GE) because it looks less cluttered).
AndyEich 1199076613|%e %b %Y, %H:%M %Z|agohover
I agree that boundaries should be unchecked, but I also would vote for thinner trail centerlines. I think we should try to avoid obscuring the underlying photos.
davidhowland14 1199077526|%e %b %Y, %H:%M %Z|agohover
Done. What is the centerline width for your trails? I really liked the look of one of the maine ones that i checked out.
AndyEich 1199107944|%e %b %Y, %H:%M %Z|agohover
I've just been using the GE default of 1.0. Thanks!
AndyEich 1199123908|%e %b %Y, %H:%M %Z|agohover
How are the colors (e.g. moss, blueberry) defined? I think we should provide a screenshot of the GE color selector and show how the colors are set. They look good to me except the green is a little darker than most trailmaps/signs I've seen.
davidhowland14 1199126786|%e %b %Y, %H:%M %Z|agohover
I posted the snapshots of the color selection pane. I'll work on getting a set of them up so that the correct "crayon" is highlighted.
AndyEich 1199129668|%e %b %Y, %H:%M %Z|agohover
Now I see where the confusion lies—GE has a totally different color selector on Windows:
… so we'll have to show how to "mix" the colors on both platforms.
davidhowland14 1199132266|%e %b %Y, %H:%M %Z|agohover
On the mac version, you can select a palette of crayons, essentially. i'll try to find the actual mixing values for the colors used.
davidhowland14 1199217462|%e %b %Y, %H:%M %Z|agohover
"To achieve "perfect" maps, one would have to discretize the trails into segments and allow some of the areas to be shared by trails (or more precisely, those areas could be reallocated across trails based on what is open). For example, if run 1 is the only one open from a given lift, the unloading area is necessarily part of run 1. If, at a different time, run 2 is the only run open from the same lift, the unloading area is part of run 2. However, it is not clear that this complication is necessary for the benefit it provides (especially since it only applies to the statistics calculated on open vs. closed terrain, which are a much lower priority than getting the static statistics right)."
I found this section really confusing, so I pruned it out. I think we should work on making basic maps and getting our basic statistics working before we start worrying about open and closed trails. That's gonna be alot more difficult to do, imo.
AndyEich 1199225307|%e %b %Y, %H:%M %Z|agohover
Good point—the part about coincident trails is crummy, too, so feel free to modify that. The H2 formatting doesn't seem to work for breaking up subsections, either.
davidhowland14 1199229859|%e %b %Y, %H:%M %Z|agohover
I did notice that subsection thing. That's pretty annoying. Maybe the way to do it is to modify the font size manually?
davidhowland14 1199231358|%e %b %Y, %H:%M %Z|agohover
I fixed it by modifying the theme. I set all of the headings for the standards pages to heading 1, so they'll need to be reset to what they need to be. What do you think of the new theme?
AndyEich 1199242999|%e %b %Y, %H:%M %Z|agohover
David, I thought your new section could be folded into the existing sections—what do you think?
I had to modify your recommendation regarding glades to make sure stats can be computed. What do you think about changing the trail boundary convention to match my recommendation for glades (no fill, colored outline)? It makes them blend in better, IMHO.
Anonymous (66.211.148.x) 1199314849|%e %b %Y, %H:%M %Z|agohover
Yeah, that sounds good to me. I like the boundary thing and I like the glade thing as well. I'll have to update some of my maps now.
Anonymous (66.211.148.x), 1199314849|%e %b %Y, %H:%M %Z|agohover
davidhowland14 1199315126|%e %b %Y, %H:%M %Z|agohover
I'm not sure what you mean by my section that you folded in?
AndyEich 1199318444|%e %b %Y, %H:%M %Z|agohover
See rev 36, the last section called "Map Conventions"… didn't you write that one?
davidhowland14 1199325356|%e %b %Y, %H:%M %Z|agohover
Ah, yeah. I remember that. I'm not sure what I think about folding it in. Maybe it deserves a new section called "Special Cases"? It seems kinda incongrous where it is.
AndyEich 1199328422|%e %b %Y, %H:%M %Z|agohover
I don't think "special cases" is the right category name—I predict that we'll keep finding more & more special cases to the point that it would become the biggest category. Maybe a special cases subsection within each section? We might eventually have enough material that we'll need to break this page up into separate ones.
Unlike mediawiki (the wikipedia one), this one doesn't seem to let you edit separate sections of a page at the same time, so that's another reason to try to keep pages small. Are you also thinking that each ski area might eventually get its own page?
davidhowland14 1199366015|%e %b %Y, %H:%M %Z|agohover
I was definitely also thinking that each resort would get its own page. Maybe on that page we could have a "Problems Encountered" section.
Why don't we just leave the page as it is. It seems fine this way, so until we ahve more material to add or a reason to change, let's leave the org. the same.
davidhowland14 1199729861|%e %b %Y, %H:%M %Z|agohover
I propose that these standards be used as Version 1. At this point I think we can start recruiting additional members. I'll post on a couple forums I frequent, and on Snowjournal.
AndyEich 1199832533|%e %b %Y, %H:%M %Z|agohover
I'm in agreement in all respects except I think we need to finalize colors. Right now I am concerned that our monitors may be causing us to choose sub-optimally.
davidhowland14 1199940304|%e %b %Y, %H:%M %Z|agohover
We also need a section dealing with a trail which is marked with two difficulty levels, such as U.N at Jay Peak. I'll write it up now, take a look and tell me what you think. It should stay as Standards 1.0.0 because no areas have been posted since version 1 went online.
davidhowland14 1200279383|%e %b %Y, %H:%M %Z|agohover
another problem I've run into mapping Jay Peak: terrain park trails. Crotched and ragged both have one, and I know there are more. We're gonna need a fourth color and a Standards Version Update to deal with this. We should decide on a color pretty soon. Most maps mark it an orange.
