Page 1 of 1
| A random musing... 16/03/2010 at 00:17 #861 | |
TylerE
149 posts |
Wouldn't it be more logical if the current View 5 became view 2, and the current views 2/3/4 shifted up one? That would greatly increase the connected-ness of adjancet screens.
Log in to reply |
| A random musing... 16/03/2010 at 00:17 #7315 | |
|
TylerE
149 posts |
Wouldn't it be more logical if the current View 5 became view 2, and the current views 2/3/4 shifted up one? That would greatly increase the connected-ness of adjancet screens.
Log in to reply |
| A random musing... 16/03/2010 at 00:38 #7317 | |
|
Pizzawesley
10 posts |
on cambridge of course... yea, I agree..
Log in to reply |
| A random musing... 16/03/2010 at 01:33 #7318 | |
|
UKTrainMan
1803 posts |
Whilst I may agree that the arrangement a bit complex and indeed it has had me a bit lost on occasion, I think it may be arranged like that for a reason. Note that VW1, VW2, VW3 and VW4 all "stitch-up" in that order and in-fact the route from Vw1 through VW2 and VW3 to vW4 may be considered as the main line route whilst Shepreth Branch Jn has the diverging route towards Royston and beyond. Also Panel 5 is considered as "The Branches" panel. I would be very interested to see Cambridge as a scrolly since that would make the layout a bit easier to understand / use however I'm not even sure that is possible without a lot of work being put in to fit all the branches/routes in. I guess the best person who could answer this is the simulation developer/s, so just need to wait to receive a reply from them on this. Any views and / or opinions expressed by myself are from me personally and do not represent those of any company I either work for or am a consultant for. Log in to reply |
| A random musing... 16/03/2010 at 16:06 #7320 | |
|
clive
2789 posts |
The developer? That's me. It so happens that I *like* paged sims, so don't hold your breath. The idea behind the ordering of the views is that screens 1 to 4 are, in order, the main line. Screen 5 holds all the branches from that line. Screen 6 was added later; really it should come before 5, but I didn't have the energy to do it, and its "simplified" nature made me feel it belonged at the end. Log in to reply |
| A random musing... 16/03/2010 at 20:36 #7321 | |
|
JamesN
1607 posts |
What about a Paged/Scrolly Hybrid?  Then you could have the mainline scrollied as VW1, the Branches as a Scrolly VW2, and the March line simplifier as a Scrolly VW3...[/Silly Suggestion Mode] Digressing a little, what about Peterborough? IIRC that comes under your camp aswell - It would certainly make a better scrolly than Cambridge (where for whatever reason Paged seems to 'suit' it) Log in to reply |
| A random musing... 17/03/2010 at 15:06 #7333 | |
|
UKTrainMan
1803 posts |
clive said:The developer? That's me.Yes thought it was you, Clive, but didn't want to look like an idiot (if I don't look like one already...) or something had I said the wrong person. Naturally I appreciate any simulation and the work put into it by the developer or developers so of course I respect your decision of making Cambridge paged rather than scrolly. Any views and / or opinions expressed by myself are from me personally and do not represent those of any company I either work for or am a consultant for. Log in to reply |