Symbol scaling on template import

[dg0yt]

gandym01 reported on Sourceforge [tickets:#394]:

When importing a template that has a different scale to the -Map- via Import and Remove, the question is asked: _How shall the symbols of the imported template map be scaled?_ The three options are:

• _Don't Scale_ - this option preserves the symbol sizes (in paper coords) from the template file.
• _Scale by Nominal Map Scale Ratio (X.X%)_ - ??
• _Scale by Current Template Scaling (X.X%)_ - the displayed symbol sizes are preserved i.e. WYSIWYG.

I am not sure what the second option means at all. When I import a 1:25,000 scale template into a 1:50,000 scale map, the nominal map scale ratio option is set to 0.0%. If I choose this option, the symbol sizes do indeed end up smaller than an atom. Is this nominal map scale ratio supposed to be derived from the ratio of the scale of the imported file and the map scale?

Broadly speaking, beyond conserving the original symbol sizes (option 1) or scaling proportionally with the spatial distribution (option 3), I cannot see an obvious third scale that option the user might want. In any event, at least the offer of 0% scaling should be removed.

gandym

[dg0yt]

Every map (OMAP, OCD) has it is nominal map scale, i.e. the one it declares to have. So when you import a 1:15000 map into a 1:10000 map, the nominal ratio shall be 1.5 (150%). This is the same option which is offered when you import from the File > Import... menu. If you see a wrong ratio, than it is a bug.

Option 1 fits for ISSOM maps (5000/4000), same symbol size. Option 2 fits for ISOM maps (10000/150000), symbols scaled. Option 3 fits for all those maps which declare another nominal scale than they are actually meant to be printed with....

Note that we are not native English speakers, so some improvements are always welcome if they are not English dialect.

[dg0yt]

• labels: Scaling --> Scaling, Templates
• summary: Changing symbol scale --> Symbol scaling on template import
• status: new --> closed
• assigned_to: Kai Pastor

[dg0yt]

The nominal ratio calculation was buggy: a division of two integers gives another integer in the first place...

And we now omit the third option if difference is below 1%.

[dg0yt]

gandym01 posted on Sourceforge:

I am not picking on your (or anyone else's) english. I am sorry if this is how I came across. Your english is infinitely better than my german! I was saying that I didn't understand because I could not see the use for option 2, partly because of the bug and partly because I did not think about cases where the template scaling might be slightly different to the nominal map scaling, resulting in duplication of symbols (thus prohibiting option 3).

Though looking at it again, the provision of option 3 purely for cases were a nominal map scale is used surprises me a bit. Is it common for orienteering maps to use an "incorrect" scale? If you come from a place (like me) where all maps are georeferenced, then this idea of a nominal map scale is nonsense (or else you have a nonsense map!!). I would have suggested that you remove the word nominal from option 2, but if map makers routinely use nominal scales and are used to thinking about them in this way, then I can see that it should be kept.

gandym

[dg0yt]

Don't worry, I'm assuming you are a native speaker and simply ask for ocassionally reviewing the wording from a native speakers's and non-developer's perspective.

I have seen a number of (old) map files which declare another nominal scale than they are actually meant to be printed with - even from experienced map makers. I also don't understand why this is/was done.

However, for the import-and-remove-template tool, option 3 is indeed the closest to WYSIWYG. The remaining difference is that as a template, the rendered symbols may have different scaling vertically and horizontally, while option 3 offers just the average scaling.