Overlay map color schemes

[michih]

I think we discussed this under https://forum.travelmapping.net/index.php?topic=427.msg32548#msg32548

https://github.com/TravelMapping/Web/issues/771

[Jim]

I'm always happy to hear feedback and suggestions.

I think what happens at wider views is that the waypoints where the drawn segments of untraveled routes overlap lose some their transparency (because those places are under 2 or more segments) making them look closer to the traveled segments.  The opacity could be dialed down for such segments but that it not currently a user-configurable setting (by TM) and I'd want to get more user feedback about this before changing that number (currently 0.3).  You can see what it would look like if opacity gets changed to 0.1 if you use the tmstage.teresco.org server, where I just changed it.

As far as implementing an option to leave off untraveled routes for Mapview, it's certainly possible.  I (or someone else) would just have to find some time to make it happen.

[leshii]

I think we discussed this under https://forum.travelmapping.net/index.php?topic=427.msg32548#msg32548

https://github.com/TravelMapping/Web/issues/771

Indeed. It looks like this has not happened yet but I think that solution is good. Hopefully it's straight forward.

[michih]

I'd want to get more user feedback about this before changing that number (currently 0.3).

I was annoyed by that for years....

You can see what it would look like if opacity gets changed to 0.1 if you use the tmstage.teresco.org server, where I just changed it.

It's great! However, it's identical to the production server. Have you changed it too?

[Jim]

I changed it in the wrong place.  Mapview on tmstage should now use a much more transparent look for the untraveled routes.  Too transparent for me but I'd be interested to hear what others think.

[vdeane]

I think that version is so transparent that the untraveled routes may as well not be there.  But perhaps "traveled only" and "untraveled only" could be added to the drop-down?

[pderocco]

I imagine some people will scream bloody murder at this, but to my taste, I'd rather not have the translucent "unhighlighted" lines at all. All we'd need is two checkboxes, for Traveled and Untraveled. Since checkboxes can be manipulated much more quickly than a pull-down, it would be really easy to momentary enable the other one if you need to see those lines too.

[leshii]

I imagine some people will scream bloody murder at this, but to my taste, I'd rather not have the translucent "unhighlighted" lines at all. All we'd need is two checkboxes, for Traveled and Untraveled. Since checkboxes can be manipulated much more quickly than a pull-down, it would be really easy to momentary enable the other one if you need to see those lines too.

This is where I am, too.

[michih]

We need All and None for maintenance. I stick with the proposal adding Traveled Only and Untraveled only, and Disable All.

[michih]

Mapview on tmstage should now use a much more transparent look for the untraveled routes.  Too transparent for me

Way too transparent. Bad for maintenance purpose. I like how it looks on the production server. I'm sure that it's better now

[LilianaUwU]

I imagine some people will scream bloody murder at this, but to my taste, I'd rather not have the translucent "unhighlighted" lines at all. All we'd need is two checkboxes, for Traveled and Untraveled. Since checkboxes can be manipulated much more quickly than a pull-down, it would be really easy to momentary enable the other one if you need to see those lines too.

I will scream bloody murder because if it ain't broke, don't fix it. I can check what segments I don't have easily with the current setup. Having to check a bunch of boxes to see something isn't user friendly.

[vdeane]

I like being able to see both clinched and unclinched segments at the same time and differentiate between them.  I wouldn't want to lose that.

[pderocco]

I wouldn't call two checkboxes as "a bunch". I don't object to the "unhighlighted" lines existing for other people, but I'd rather not use them, so I'd like a way to turn them off and just leave only the opaque "highlighted" lines, showing either driven, undriven, or all. But having that many choices means we're stuck with pull-down lists.

[michih]

I'd want to get more user feedback about this before changing that number (currently 0.3).

I was annoyed by that for years....

You can see what it would look like if opacity gets changed to 0.1 if you use the tmstage.teresco.org server, where I just changed it.

It's great! However, it's identical to the production server. Have you changed it too?

I remember what annoyed me. Switch to "Color by concurrencies" and "Highlight None". The overlap of two blue lines at the intersecting wp is very dark. It sometimes looks like broken concurrency from lower zoom. See attached.

[vdeane]

I'd want to get more user feedback about this before changing that number (currently 0.3).

I was annoyed by that for years....

You can see what it would look like if opacity gets changed to 0.1 if you use the tmstage.teresco.org server, where I just changed it.

It's great! However, it's identical to the production server. Have you changed it too?

I remember what annoyed me. Switch to "Color by concurrencies" and "Highlight None". The overlap of two blue lines at the intersecting wp is very dark. It sometimes looks like broken concurrency from lower zoom. See attached.

I have noticed that the blue lines tend to have less contrast between segments that are highlighted and those that aren't than the other colors do, especially when zoomed out.  In fact, If I show my travels on usai to people who aren't roadgeeks, they'll assume that I've clinched the whole system because the contrast is low enough they can't tell the difference.