Talk:Nautical chart
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is part of WikiProject Maritime Trades, a group of editors working to improve Merchant Shipping topics. To learn more or join the project, please visit the project page. | |
| Start | This article has been rated as start-Class on the assessment scale. | |
| Mid | This article has been rated as mid-importance on the assessment scale. |
[edit] Image not very useful
I am sorry to say that Image:US NOAA nautical chart of Bering Strait.png is not overly representative: it does not look like a typical nautical chart, although it contains some relevant information. In particular, there are no coordinates, the fonts look unusual, the scale is unclear and it does not show the notes on hydrographic sources, explanations and cautions that are typical for most charts. There are also no frames for charts of other scale (which one would inevitably expect for a chart of this level of detail). The political information is very sparse (typical charts denote names of countries and borders very clearly, but this has only an inconspicuous line that may or may not an international border). All in all, it looks rather like an excerpt from a low resolution map from an electronic navigation system. Unfortunately, hydrographers are rather peculiar about their copyrights so it may be hard to find a suitable replacement. Kosebamse 09:24, 11 November 2005 (UTC)
- Agreed - I've moved that image down to a new section on electronic charts, and added some scans of an older 1970s chart downloaded from the United States NOAA. CDC (talk) 03:17, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
- Its image page describes exactly how the Bering Strait chart was produced, so there is no need to speculate. Given that I found the page with no picture of a chart, whether typical or not, it was an improvement! It's nice to see better examples have finally been added. I do think the thumbnails are too small; I had used 380px rather than the default 180px, so a reader could see enough detail to give a meaningful sense of the content. --KSmrqT 09:24, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
