Course Overprint on Urban Maps

[rf_fozzy]

On a slightly different, but related, issue, at the Gdansk City Race last weekend I saw an approach for course lines that would pass through another control circle that I hadn't seen before. I don't know what the rules say about it, but to me it seems beneficial in making the sequence of controls clearer and so avoiding mispunching.

Maybe not *quite* done like that, but bending lines by small amounts to prevent intersections with previous/future controls is (should be?) fairly standard practice.

I've certainly done this before.

This is where number placement, and moving them around in PP/OCAD is sensible and a good idea. The white 0.15mm border that I use (in addition to make them bold), means you can stick them in a nearby building or patch of olive green and make it obvious which circle is which.

[King Penguin]

... but in some positionings the white outline can make it look as if there is a passage where there isn't.

[rf_fozzy]

... but in some positionings the white outline can make it look as if there is a passage where there isn't.

Yeah which is why you need to be careful about number positioning. As I've said before.

But genuinely some of you lot seem to like to make mountains out of molehills. I've yet to encounter a single example where me putting a 0.15mm (v thin!) border on a carefully placed number has caused an issue.

I've done/seen lots of events where people haven't cut circles, lines, put numbers over uncrossable walls in ginnels, not respected minimum widths and mapping specs which makes the map difficult to read (or mapping every single wall bounding olive green areas in tight housing estates cluttering the map) or just done weird nonsense like deleting all buildings or taking off building borders etc that just doesn't help anything.

If you think a 0.15mm border is evidence of a passage, I'd argue that's because we have too many maps where minimum gaps have not been respected when drawing the map....

For a special snook-o informal event in even had to put 0.15mm white borders around some control circles so they were easy to read. The competitors were warned and it was not a problem for anyone mistaking it for a narrow ginnel. Obviously not something I'd do for a proper event, but clear this isn't an issue in general and just seems to live in heads as "here is a big problem waiting to happen"

[Scott]

In the very early days of "urban"-style orienteering in the UK (Oct 2007), I was the organiser for an event where the white border around a control number led to a number of competitors passing through a private/locked gate in what was intended to be an uncrossable wall - assisted in part by helpful residents holding the gate open for them - so it can happen, but one example in 18 years doesn't exactly make for a major risk, and I agree that it should be possible to avoid it with careful planning.

Edit: here's the Nopesport discussion from the time!

[pete.owens]

If you are using purple pen it is worth specifying a white outline for the numbers in order to force them to the top colour layer in the printing. If you don't want the white outline to be visible then specify a very narrow width (0.01 mm).

[rf_fozzy]

If you are using purple pen it is worth specifying a white outline for the numbers in order to force them to the top colour layer in the printing. If you don't want the white outline to be visible then specify a very narrow width (0.01 mm).

Erm. No. You don't need to do this.

You can choose which layer they sit in in the latest version of PP.

And even in the older version, you can tell the PP purple to sit on top. Because for urbans I usually do - because the IOF specs aren't designed for areas with lots of Olive Green where the purple and green can blur together.

This is why a small colour change to C20M100 (suggested to me by an active IOF advisor) and setting them to sit on the top helps with ISSprOM maps. And a 0.15mm border makes a difference too.

I would not choose an 0.01mm border because (a) that is useless as you won't be able to see it and (b) **may** (although I'd have to check with BML) introduce printing artefacts.

[pete.owens]

If you are using purple pen it is worth specifying a white outline for the numbers in order to force them to the top colour layer in the printing. If you don't want the white outline to be visible then specify a very narrow width (0.01 mm).

Erm. No. You don't need to do this.

You can choose which layer they sit in in the latest version of PP.

The trouble is that applies to the whole overprint whereas the standard specifies 2 purple layers: One for the lines and circles (below point and line features) and another for the numbers on top of everything.

In PP, If you select the purple to be above map layer "lower purple for course overprint" then the course circles and lines will be correct, but the numbers will be obscured by map detail.

I would not choose an 0.01mm border because (a) that is useless as you won't be able to see it

That is the entire point.

You need to use the outline feature to achieve the correct layering - even if you don't want visible white outlines.

[rf_fozzy]

If you are using purple pen it is worth specifying a white outline for the numbers in order to force them to the top colour layer in the printing. If you don't want the white outline to be visible then specify a very narrow width (0.01 mm).

Erm. No. You don't need to do this.

You can choose which layer they sit in in the latest version of PP.

The trouble is that applies to the whole overprint whereas the standard specifies 2 purple layers: One for the lines and circles (below point and line features) and another for the numbers on top of everything.

In PP, If you select the purple to be above map layer "lower purple for course overprint" then the course circles and lines will be correct, but the numbers will be obscured by map detail.

I would not choose an 0.01mm border because (a) that is useless as you won't be able to see it

That is the entire point.

You need to use the outline feature to achieve the correct layering - even if you don't want visible white outlines.

Sure. Whatever. You seem to know best. About every single thing in the entire span of orienteering.

Amazing you're not running the IOF really.

No point in any further discussion with you.