Stanardizing the map extensions

[plloyd1010]

The next cleanup project for PG Uber is a quick one, Standardizing map listing and nomenclature.

First question, Map or Board? Map or mapboard is standard on the APL pages. Sometimes the term board gets used. So it's a question.

Group maps (or boards) by reference or orientation. That is to say, should they be?
    Map 01
    Map 02
    Map 01 - 90°
    Map 02 - 90°
Or?
    Map 01
    Map 01 - 90°
    Map 02
    Map 02 - 90°

Last what should the orientation nomenclature be? Right now it is a combination of 90° or Rotated, with the map number being in the lower left and the hex grain running horizontally. Should the orientation reference be

1. Vert/Horiz,referring to hex gain
   
2. 90°, with the number in the lower left
   
3. Rotated, again with the number in the lower left
   
4. something else?
   

Anyone have any thoughts?

[treadasaurusrex]

The next cleanup project for PG Uber is a quick one, Standardizing map listing and nomenclature.

First question, Map or Board? Map or mapboard is standard on the APL pages. Sometimes the term board gets used. So it's a question.

Group maps (or boards) by reference or orientation. That is to say, should they be?
    Map 01
    Map 02
    Map 01 - 90°
    Map 02 - 90°
Or?
    Map 01
    Map 01 - 90°
    Map 02
    Map 02 - 90°

Last what should the orientation nomenclature be? Right now it is a combination of 90° or Rotated, with the map number being in the lower left and the hex grain running horizontally. Should the orientation reference be

1. Vert/Horiz,referring to hex gain
   
2. 90°, with the number in the lower left
   
3. Rotated, again with the number in the lower left
   
4. something else?
   

Anyone have any thoughts?

Thanks Peter,

My vote is for calling them all, "Map" and using the terms: "landscape" or "portrait," and "rotated" as appropriate, for sake of clarity. 

I assume that we are keeping the "flip" option for map setup, que no?

[plloyd1010]

The flip option is required to accommodate map configurations, so it will remain.

Landscape and rotated are the same in my mind. Portrait is an interesting option.

[Grognard Gunny]

It is standard practice for printing (i.e. aligning of sheets of paper) (but you already knew that), so why not use the nomenclature?

GG

[plloyd1010]

It is standard practice for printing (i.e. aligning of sheets of paper) (but you already knew that), so why not use the nomenclature?

GG

There is also the potential issue of making the list look too busy. One map set would look like this:

Map 01 - Portrait
Map 02 - Portrait
Map 03 - Portrait
Map 04 - Portrait
Map 05 - Portrait
Map 06 - Portrait
Map 07 - Portrait
Map 08 - Portrait
Map 01 - Landscape
Map 02 - Landscape
Map 03 - Landscape
Map 04 - Landscape
Map 05 - Landscape
Map 06 - Landscape
Map 07 - Landscape
Map 08 - Landscape

Not unreasonable, but a bit wordy for a pull-down menu.

[Shad]

All geomorphic maps are portrait by default, we know this because of the map ID number orientation. Therefore you can omit "portrait" entirely.

If you think Map 01 - Landscape is too long, how about just 01 and 01L ?

Do we even need the word "map" ?

[Grognard Gunny]

If we but obfuscate rather than improve.......

GG

[plloyd1010]

If we but obfuscate rather than improve.......

Hence the theme. Don't want to over sterilize or complicate the list.
 

All geomorphic maps are portrait by default, we know this because of the map ID number orientation. Therefore you can omit "portrait" entirely.

If you think Map 01 - Landscape is too long, how about just 01 and 01L ?

Do we even need the word "map" ?

I think we need the Map or Board. Map seems to be the appropriate convention. I am still debating in mind nothing and 90°, Portrait and Landscape, and Vert and Horiz. Nothing and 90° appears cleanest.

BtW: None of this will appear until the December update, unless there is a new map extension.