I put these topic to se what people think of these in map foundru.
If you follow my topic WW2 eastern front, yuo maybe see that i have wery strange demand, and these demant only i must apply. Here these Demand.
1. All names must be in terittory(only Sevastopol and sarema not include and 3 stared terittory.
2.All names not must taching Circle.
3. All circle must be in terittory and dont must taching names or borders.
These 3 demand must be equal for all map authors not only for me.
EQUAL RIGHT FOR ALL MAP AUTHORS
Moderator: Cartographers
Forum rules
Please read the Community Guidelines before posting.
Please read the Community Guidelines before posting.
Re: EQUAL RIGHT FOR ALL MAP AUTHORS
qwert wrote:I put these topic to se what people think of these in map foundru.
If you follow my topic WW2 eastern front, yuo maybe see that i have wery strange demand, and these demant only i must apply. Here these Demand.
1. All names must be in terittory(only Sevastopol and sarema not include and 3 stared terittory.
2.All names not must taching Circle.
3. All circle must be in terittory and dont must taching names or borders.
These 3 demand must be equal for all map authors not only for me.
it seems that you don't understand anything
it is not the same on each map, on some it looks good on some it doesn't
may i ask how old you are?
I really don't understand why you feel you're hard done by qwert. You refuse to participate by foundry standards and make accusations all over the place, usually in other peoples map threads.
1. Who ever said that? It's a ridiculous point and I don't think anybody should be expected to meet this "demand".
2. As a general rule I think it's good to have some space between territory names and army shadows. I know the map you're refering to though, and the Mongol empire is fine as it is as has already been discussed in its own thread. I really think consistency is the key for this point and where possible cartographers should strive to keep the space between territory names and army shadows consistent throughout the whole map.
3. There are obviously some exceptions to this rule where geography doesn't allow this, for example islands. For most instances though, unless there is a good reason not to, I think it's an important visual aspect for shadows to fit cleanly within their defined territories borders. Again, not always possible... but if it can be easily achieved, then I see no reason not to.
1. Who ever said that? It's a ridiculous point and I don't think anybody should be expected to meet this "demand".
2. As a general rule I think it's good to have some space between territory names and army shadows. I know the map you're refering to though, and the Mongol empire is fine as it is as has already been discussed in its own thread. I really think consistency is the key for this point and where possible cartographers should strive to keep the space between territory names and army shadows consistent throughout the whole map.
3. There are obviously some exceptions to this rule where geography doesn't allow this, for example islands. For most instances though, unless there is a good reason not to, I think it's an important visual aspect for shadows to fit cleanly within their defined territories borders. Again, not always possible... but if it can be easily achieved, then I see no reason not to.
It's all related to the specific map. Some maps try to be true to their actual territory boundries, which means they are too small to have a shaded circle fit totally inside. As long as it's obvious as to which territory the circle is applied, I don't see the point. If it doesn't, the members here in the forum will let you know during the creation process.
-
ViscountGort
- Posts: 35
- Joined: Mon Jan 22, 2007 7:21 am
- Location: University of Durham, England
Re: EQUAL RIGHT FOR ALL MAP AUTHORS
Wisse wrote:may i ask how old you are?
I'd really love to know the answer to this qwert!
I've got to say you're the most unbelievably petulant person I've ever come across, but I confess I absolutely love reading your posts. Your WW2 map thread is one of the most entertaining, and most absurd, things I've ever read. And now this poll... it's just off-the-scale stupidity.
i hate it when i see a old thread with no oldest picture 
-
AndyDufresne
- Posts: 24935
- Joined: Fri Mar 03, 2006 8:22 pm
- Location: A Banana Palm in Zihuatanejo
- Contact:
i believe this issue does need to be clarified so i will try as i understand it:
every map maker is equal in what they are meant to do in getting a map published
however a map maker must put the will of the foundry at large into the map not his own opinion unless there are circumstances preventing this or a specific reason why the map maker does not wish to do this.
These reasons must be stated in the appropriate thread
Andy decides when maps go into final forge and (with lacks approval) get quenched
A map maker gives up their own free time to do this so are at liberty to go into vacation or abandonment at any time however it is good manners again to post this in the thread.
If i have this wrong could somebody please correct me
and if anybody believes these rules are bad rules please explain why
and if anybody believes that these rules have been broken in any map (qwerts in particular considering the recent discussions) could they again explain where
This way we all know where we stand.
every map maker is equal in what they are meant to do in getting a map published
however a map maker must put the will of the foundry at large into the map not his own opinion unless there are circumstances preventing this or a specific reason why the map maker does not wish to do this.
These reasons must be stated in the appropriate thread
Andy decides when maps go into final forge and (with lacks approval) get quenched
A map maker gives up their own free time to do this so are at liberty to go into vacation or abandonment at any time however it is good manners again to post this in the thread.
If i have this wrong could somebody please correct me
and if anybody believes these rules are bad rules please explain why
and if anybody believes that these rules have been broken in any map (qwerts in particular considering the recent discussions) could they again explain where
This way we all know where we stand.
qwert wrote:Wisse why you want to these topic lock, only i can say andy to lock these topic, and i realy dont see reason for these, i dont insulting people in these topic. Andy can lock these topic if he thinks that these topic not have anytning with map foundry, or if i insulting people.
i think this is an old topic that already is been considered
Molacole wrote:1. qwert you need a binky
2. you need to work on your english because you have obvious comprehension problems.
3. stop being so stubborn you can't alway get your way
4. f*ck off already...
1. mind your own bissinus (^sp)
2. you don't have to speak perfect english...
3. if you don't like your food are you gonna eat it because somone next to you sais (^sp) you have to?
4. do it yourself
boberz wrote:i believe this issue does need to be clarified so i will try as i understand it:
every map maker is equal in what they are meant to do in getting a map published
however a map maker must put the will of the foundry at large into the map not his own opinion unless there are circumstances preventing this or a specific reason why the map maker does not wish to do this.
These reasons must be stated in the appropriate thread
Andy decides when maps go into final forge and (with lacks approval) get quenched
A map maker gives up their own free time to do this so are at liberty to go into vacation or abandonment at any time however it is good manners again to post this in the thread.
If i have this wrong could somebody please correct me
and if anybody believes these rules are bad rules please explain why
and if anybody believes that these rules have been broken in any map (qwerts in particular considering the recent discussions) could they again explain where
This way we all know where we stand.
can i assume all this is correct and nobody has any issues with this whatsoever