New Royston signals map using PNG images

red 'uns and green 'uns

I was referring to the Wiki in general, it's lot better that it was but from time to time blitzes are made on it but often the enthusiasm dies off till the next time.

Quote:

red 'uns and green 'uns

Or

A Cherry
1 Banana
2 Bananas
A Lime

And yes I've heard these used by people aspect watching real signals on the real railway.

I wouldn't bother adding it to the wiki tho :)

FF

" said:

I was referring to the Wiki in general, it's lot better that it was but from time to time blitzes are made on it but often the enthusiasm dies off till the next time.

Peter

Partly because it's a massive project. Having said that, Steamer is doing magnificent work.

I would be devastated if I had spent so much time on one of the signalling diagrams regardless of how big the Sim only for some one to come along and suggest so many changes to it.

Max, have you looked at Euston yet? I put signal numbers into it just for you.

maxand wrote:
I've added links to new signals maps for Royston to its manual page

What was wrong with the old one?

maxand wrote:
All right, guys, stop talking in jargon that isn't even in the Wiki.

You're on a signalling forum discussing signalling. How is it wrong to use signalling terms? Or should we just call them "red 'uns" and "green 'uns" just in case some passer-by doesn't get the meaning?

I think I should underline the fact that we already have a standard for Signal Number Diagrams. It's one of the few things on the Wiki that is standard! Until today, they were all inverted colours with black labels, and that standard has been there for years. This is the first time anyone's actually criticized them that I know of, so in the interest of not destroying said set standard, can we please not flood the Wiki with unnecesary duplicate information for the sake of pretty colours?

'Course, being really picky, signal labels in blue are those fitted with TPWS; those in grey without. But that's likely being too pedantic.

Above all, I'm happy with the guidelines laid out in my earlier post, which should help new sim writers create their own maps. I don't care if all maps don't match what I've outlined, as long as they're internally consistent.

Karl

I bet you're glad you spent all that time putting a diagram together just to stimulate this type of discussion.

If it aint broke, dont fix it

4) The font and size of signal numbers should not be too small, too large, too thin or too thick, and should not be antialiased (to make it easy to change to a different colour). The font and the colour chosen should be significantly distinctive so that there is no risk of mistaking a signal number for any other background text.

6) Where there is no obstruction, a signal number should appear in the same position relative to each signal for neatness and consistency.

7) To avoid confusion, signal numbers should appear exactly as displayed when the user right-clicks the signal, i.e., with the full prefix. Ideally, this is also what the Train List (F2) should display for trains waiting at a signal.

2) To help users, particularly newbies, discriminate better between different types of signals I have left numbers for automatic signals grey, the same colour as for non-signalled track. Different shades of grey in the same view tend to clash.

5) Leaving automatic signal numbers as grey helps the user to omit them from the signal searched for.

Max, you appear to have set down the standards we should all follow as if they're new, however, apart from your colour notes, they all appear to be the same as the self-imposed standards used by Postal, Headshot and myself.
There are a few that I'd like to comment on in more detail:
" said:

4) The font and size of signal numbers should not be too small, too large, too thin or too thick, and should not be antialiased (to make it easy to change to a different colour). The font and the colour chosen should be significantly distinctive so that there is no risk of mistaking a signal number for any other background text.

They did that already! In fact, if I look on your latest version, you've coloured auto numbers as grey, which could easily be mistaken as a label!

6) Where there is no obstruction, a signal number should appear in the same position relative to each signal for neatness and consistency.
" said:

Again, this is attempted, but this depends very much on surrounding detail. On some simulations, the distance between auto signals is not consistant through out the simulation becasue of space considerations.

Very good of you to define without consultation the standards the rest of us should use.

Anyone who likes my style is welcome to create their own, but the principles of doing it this way are more important than trying to set a new standard. Above all, I'm happy with the guidelines laid out in my earlier post...

Personally, I think that the way headshot did his Saltley signal diagram was superior. It is a brilliant and cheap way of printing out a diagram which I have stuck on my wall.

when the general consensus has been to use the inverted colour scheme, why try and change it.

As John rightly says, it sounds like you are defining the standards that we should follow. At least consult before coming to the decision.

if I look on your latest version, you've coloured auto numbers as grey, which could easily be mistaken as a label

Which is great, unless said user is looking for an automatic signal's ID! From what I've gathered from your posts about your playing style, you may need to only find controlled signal numbers, but someone who is working around a Track Circuit or Signal failure will need to know Auto signal numbers, since said failures can occur anywhere on the Sim.

Why bother setting a standard that requires complex and possibly expensive graphics programs that people are likely to be daunted by, and thus putting them off contributing?

maxand wrote:
I've added links to new signals maps for Royston to its manual page

What was wrong with the old one?

Postal,

The bus leaves in five minutes....hop on board ;)