November 26, 2009 17:55
OK, I've digested your comments some more and have more add/inquire about.
1. Thanks on the +/- I was having trouble figuring out what these were for. I've seen the HELP and the README for the program. Is there more info out there some where that covers this such functionality as this in detail?
2. Do you actually mean the bottom/right would be more accurate? The map of greater detail at a more focused view? (I think the term scale confuses me at the moment).
3. Understood. Although I attempted this I was not seeing what would be described as the "details" under the Attribute and Value Column in the lower text box. I needed to "poke around" more!
4. Understood, I do see the challenge even knowing I don't understand scale (yet). When a map states it is 1:xxxx (scale?) doesn't that value convert to a equivalent in distance? I'm looking at my paper charts to see if there is a consistency in the scale to distance.
1. Thanks on the +/- I was having trouble figuring out what these were for. I've seen the HELP and the README for the program. Is there more info out there some where that covers this such functionality as this in detail?
2. Do you actually mean the bottom/right would be more accurate? The map of greater detail at a more focused view? (I think the term scale confuses me at the moment).
3. Understood. Although I attempted this I was not seeing what would be described as the "details" under the Attribute and Value Column in the lower text box. I needed to "poke around" more!
4. Understood, I do see the challenge even knowing I don't understand scale (yet). When a map states it is 1:xxxx (scale?) doesn't that value convert to a equivalent in distance? I'm looking at my paper charts to see if there is a consistency in the scale to distance.