GEOSAP

I think we should further define how subfolders can be used to better organize areas. For example, on the Sunday River map I tried to break down the area into separate peaks. This can make it more difficult to find a trail you're looking for (especially for ones that are not clearly associated with one peak), but without it the trail list can become unwieldy. If this is permitted, should lifts be separated by peak as well?

Another case where I think subfolder organization might help is in managing trail boundaries vs. centerlines. When I want to turn trail boundaries on/off, I usually want to do it for all trails at once, and since they are not in a separate folder from the trail centerlines, which I usually leave on, it is a very tedious process. Is this view shared by others?

I think it goes without saying that planned expansions should be in a separate folder so they can be turned on/off with one click.

We also should consider whether/what kind of points of interest (lodges, bars, tourist attractions) should be allowed in the kmz files.

Some thoughts:
1. Need to figure out how to handle freestyle/terrain park/half pipes. There are a lot more of these than I realized, and many are getting orange(?) ratings or being rated at really high difficulties even though the pitch is low. These will mess up our stats.
2. Need to figure out how to handle tubing. Maybe we could ignore it other than lifts that are also used for skiers? Is the terrain ever used for skiing as well?
3. I've been putting source information in the "description" pane of each area in GE. Now that I have a lot of them, the fact that GE displays the first couple lines of this info in the "places" browser on the left has become annoying. I can only see 1/3 the number of areas I would be able to see at once if they had nothing in the description. Should I remove this info and just keep it on the wiki?
4. Having trail boundaries separate is working well, but we then need to name this other folder. I think it might be best to rename "Trails" to "Trail Centerlines" and call the new folder "Trail Boundaries" so it mirrors the name of our mapping standards headings. I jumped the gun and did this on my recent areas, so they are technically non-compliant. If we do this, should it be v1.0 or 1.1?
5. I'm questioning whether we need to bother giving trail boundaries edge colors. As long as there is a 1-to-1 mapping between boundaries and centerlines, the software could look up the centerline to get the difficulty, and that would save us a lot of work. It also makes it possible to link the trail boundaries' properties so that you can easily turn on white fill to produce nice screen captures. The only issue I see are trails that have sections with different ratings. To figure out which boundary corresponds to which trail, the software would have to do some (fairly simple) math.
6. I've been using PNG's for the ski area screen shots to avoid the fuzzy effect of JPG. I see they are a lot bigger than I expected, though—do we have size/bandwidth limits to worry about? Should we switch to JPG anyway? Wikidot doesn't create a thumbnail when you shrink a picture, so they're even taking a long time to display.