On 10 Oct 2007, at 14:03, Gilles Bassière wrote:
If you design a very nice map, with pertinent symbology, color scheme, etc, you might be upset if your rendering software make it ugly
Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. Also accessibility needs to be considered. There's no point in creating a beautiful colourful map of greens and blues if your colour blind reader can't discern the two colours. Or, for instance, if it photocopies badly. Here in the UK we had a range of 1:25k paper maps aimed at walkers, cyclists, outdoor types which were 'rendered' (this was pre-digital, but quite recent) in black, white, grey and green and they worked perfectly. They were subsequently replaced by full colour maps which make, to many people's eyes, the maps more fussy and harder to 'use'.
Good rendering is that which fits the job at hand. I'd say that as such it is context dependent and almost entirely qualitative (once you've got the basics correct - features in the right places etc) and doesn't really lend itself to quantitative analysis. I'd love to hear your views though,
Cheers, Andrew --- Andrew Larcombe Freelance Geospatial, Database & Web Programming web: http://www.andrewlarcombe.co.uk email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] icq: 306690163 _______________________________________________ Geowanking mailing list [email protected] http://lists.burri.to/mailman/listinfo/geowanking
