Madpom > 2015/07/24 13:54
Yes - I set it all up on my own laptop and it all looked good - good contrast between colours. Then looked at it on my work laptop and some of the colours are indistinguishable! Aargh. Will try again.
Some work on map stuff is coming soon, including a key
Yarmoss > 2015/07/24 09:19
More specifically to your question, I find high contrast to split the routes up better, so that would be a vote for garish. I liked the original alternating 3 colours that used to be used as it broke up the segments nicely. I understand what your getting at with an at-a-glance difficulty rating colourmetrically but currently I think the red blends in with the blue too much.
Yarmoss > 2015/07/24 09:14
Hey Mat, I need to look at the forums more! I've been scratching my head ever since the colours changed trying to figure out what the classifications are but haven't been able to figure it out. I'm not the sharpest tool in the shed so I would find some sort of key on the map would be very helpful :)
Bernieq > 2015/07/17 19:10
The darker colours are OK but, I agree, they can be difficult to distinguish - a legend would be useful when you've settled on the specifics.
Just thinking - what about subdued colours for the map - then, when moused over, highlight with a related 2yo colour)
eg when selectind a segment, dark blue -> bright blue, dark red -> lipstick red, etc.
BTW, would be good? to be able to select what routes show :
Default to all route segments showing but be able to select (with check boxes) any combination of the different route types as well as all user-x routes, and all my routes (draft and/or published).
Perhaps an option to display all incomplete route segments (to encourage others to complete them) ?
Madpom > 2015/07/17 07:51
Still experimenting with track colours. I've backed off from the garish colours I tried briefly yesterday to a more subtle variations.
Current schema gives a range of shades that let you know roughly what type of route you're looking at, road/walk/track/route but with the variations between the individual sub-categories too subtle to pick up easily. This results in a less garish, less cluttered map than I had when using clear primary/secondary colours for each category.
What are your thoughts - is the aesthetics/clarity of the map important (a subtler range of darker colours which stand out better against the background but are hard to differentiate)? Or is identifying the exact route type at a glance more important (garish colours, each route type very different colour from others, map looks like a 2-year old's scribble pad).
Thoughts very welcome.
Madpom > 2015/07/16 19:44
I've put in a more colourful scheme for differentiating roads from benched tracks from tramping tracks from routes at a glance. I feel this is a mixed blessing - with this you gain information, but lose clarity/contrast.
Any thoughts? Better now or before? Or suggestions of better colours?