Other World Mapper Forum

Hey

I started this thread to dedicate a place to write my ideas about OWM, and others, who has any ideas, post it under.
These ideas can help the developers to improve OWM. Maybe not the written idea helps, but the thinking start from it.
It's good to know that, I using CAD and GIS software, so my ideas mostly inspired by these software.
My first bunch of ideas are the following:
- Docking of toolbars would be nice. If the tools window would be exploded, we can dock different toolbars to different locations inside the window.
- Import simple images as Layers, not just background images.
- Locking layers to prevent loss of hours of hard work.
- Import some geospatial data format, for example SHP. OWM not using Z value, so simply dropping it would be nice.
- Full metric settings inside the tools. Now, you can set metric options in the properties of a new map, but not in the tools. There is only pixel based scale option.
That's for now, but I will keep on testing to pop up other ideas.
Thanks

Hello!

MBFoldmeres wrote: - Docking of toolbars would be nice. If the tools window would be exploded, we can dock different toolbars to different locations inside the window.

Right now the tools window locks left or right on the side of the program window. We'll look into additional options for docking/exploding with V1.X releases.

MBFoldmeres wrote: - Import simple images as Layers, not just background images.

Currently you can setup a landmass with a background image (you could draw a rectangular landmass if necessary). Or were you thinking of smaller images? Normally that would be covered by importing features.
What situations were you thinking of using this functionality?

MBFoldmeres wrote: - Locking layers to prevent loss of hours of hard work.

Right now you can select "lock" from the edit menu to lock a particular map item in place (but you can still change its properties). Were you thinking of a locking option where properties are locked too?

MBFoldmeres wrote: - Import some geospatial data format, for example SHP. OWM not using Z value, so simply dropping it would be nice.

We talked about it during the campaign and we'll definitely look into it.

MBFoldmeres wrote: - Full metric settings inside the tools. Now, you can set metric options in the properties of a new map, but not in the tools. There is only pixel based scale option.

That's something that we didn't think about. Would it make sense to have non-pixel units for outline sizes, etc? What properties should have non-pixel units?

Thank you for the feedback!

- Alejandro

Hey,

Let's take a look:

Currently you can setup a landmass with a background image (you could draw a rectangular landmass if necessary). Or were you thinking of smaller images? Normally that would be covered by importing features.
What situations were you thinking of using this functionality?

If I try to make a map, based upon real world, the easiest way to do it with OWM is, to import an image file to background, and draw it with OWM tools. Call this method a simply vectorization. It can be made easier, if the background image is a simple layer, not just a setup inside the canvas options. That is true, it's basicly not different, but according my opinion, it would be better. (Experience based on OCAD use)

Right now you can select "lock" from the edit menu to lock a particular map item in place (but you can still change its properties). Were you thinking of a locking option where properties are locked too?

In usual CAD softwares, the lock function locks the geometry and attributes too. The lock doesn't have any effect for snapping, but for modification. If I lock a layer, I lock it to prevent modifications. In my opinion, the modification of properties can mess up things too, so I prefer "full" lock.

That's something that we didn't think about. Would it make sense to have non-pixel units for outline sizes, etc? What properties should have non-pixel units?

In this point, I also think about real map vectorization. For example, if you scan a map, with a given scale, you can set the size of the map (A4 for example), but if you want to print it, in some cases, it's important to know, what is the weight of a line, and if you want to print it, you should know the metric size of the line, not the pixel size. For example, during my topography studies, we learned that, the thinest line, which can be drawn manually is 0.1 mm, and there is a definition, which map item can be drawn with it. If I want to draw in this way, the pixel system won't help me much, I need a metric one, to know, what line weight is 0,1 mm thin.
That is true, OWM won't require that kind of accuracy, and what I mentioned above doesn't make any sense, but it can help, if someone try to re-draw real topography data. I know, probably no one will use OWM for this purpose, so if you think, it's not required, pls ignore this idea:)

I will post other ideas a bit later, when I got more expeeience using OWM:)
Thanks:)

...and a few more for today.
Maybe others got some idea from this.

- Improved labeling - Enable to label each feature, or region, or landmass, or etc., instead of place a feature, and place a text inside it. If you put an option, to label an item from it's name value, it can help a lot. However, this labeling requires a placement tool for it, but maybe you can implement it to Label properties to a new section
- Coding - I adviced that, use multiple coding for characters, or simply use UTF8, so unique language characters can be used in labels.
- It would be nice, if we can split a polygon (landmass) for 2 separate part with one line. I haven't found any simple splitting with line function. Am I missed something? If there is no such a tool, please implement it:)
- Expand and collapse options for Layers. According some bug, the Canvas main layer collapse in some cases, and it would be nice, if I can expand it with one click.
- If I save a project file, the program can't save the used settings, or toolbox replacements. I set the opacity, line weight, draw mode, etc, and when I restart the program, it will use the default values. The project file is able to store these settings, or it can be modified to do so.

That's all for now, but I keep on going:)

Hello Again!

From the original post
1) Doing images as their own layers could be a useful function. We'll discuss it internally more. It may be something we add after V1.0 is out.

2) We'll add an option to lock properties as well as preventing transforming (we'll see if it goes with V0.9.1 or after V1.0.1).

3) So your point was about printed size of line in measurement units? That actually makes a lot of sense and would be based on the resolution selected for the map. I wish we could get that in before the first release, but it's too much of a change since we didn't plan for that originally. We'll add it as a "for after V1.0.1" feature.

From the second post
1) We have partial implementation of that. If you go to the Map menu, under "Auto Labels" you can setup labels automatically from the name. I know that's not all the way there, but it's a start. We do plan to add better labeling functionality after V1.0.1.

2) Investigating this. We thought we had this working? We tested German/Spanish/Portuguese unique characters so we'll see what's going on.

3) You have the partition tool (from awesome feedback early on) that does exactly that . It can also separate with fractal or curved lines.

4) We'll fix the bug and it should take care of it.

5) You can currently "Export Map Theme" which will save all your current tool settings. We'll look into the option of the theme settings saving with the map file by default.

Thank you for the feedback!!

- Alejandro