Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Roman Roads (2017)

sashamaps.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 166 posts

Re: Roman Roads (2017)

#51

Post by madcaptenor »

kevin_thibedeau wrote: post #28
madcaptenor wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I actually refer to his list of 20 simple, distinct colors ( https://sashamaps.net/docs/resources/20-colors/ ) which he came up with for this map, pretty frequently. It's a nice palette.

An easy trick is to rotate hue with a spacing of 1.618. That guarantees maximum separation with no near collisions for any number of hues.

I've heard this one before. It only takes advantage of one dimension of the color space, though, and that bugs me. On the other hand you don't have to go look up a better palette.

Re: Roman Roads (2017)

#52

Post by xandrius »

wongarsu wrote: post #36
hammock wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

With baggage, a typical human can only travel about 12-17 miles a day (half that of a horse)

About 30km/18 miles per day is a common value used in Europe. On a single day you can easily do twice that if you don't carry too much and are used to walking long distances, but it would be difficult to sustain. Also the number allows for time to set up camp (and tear it down in the morning), prepare meals, etc.

Saying that 60km "can be easily done" is quite a stretch. After 30-40km, even on flat, most people wouldn't do it easily at all.

And I walk about 10km daily in one session and often do 30+km hikes.

Re: Roman Roads (2017)

#53

Post by gtmitchell »

behnamoh wrote: post #10

Sometimes I wonder if we've regressed in terms of attention to quality. Here in the US, I see lots of potholes on the streets and sidewalks. Meanwhile, the ancient cobblestone roads are still functional to this day.

Rome had the advantage of access to essentially unlimited forced labor in order to build and maintain their infrastructure. Modern engineering is absolutely superior to Roman engineering, but we do have to contend with budget constraints, at least in part because we're not using slavery to build our roads.

Re: Roman Roads (2017)

#54

Post by dang »

nerdponx wrote: post #4

The original creator's page is: https://sashamaps.net/docs/maps/roman-roads-original/ The summary here links right to the original content. I just wanted to highlight the original for the sake of other readers clicking through quickly. There's also a much more detailed (and more interesting) writeup on the creator's page.

Ok, we changed the URL to that from https://www.openculture.com/2024/06/the-roads-of-ancient-rom.... Thanks!

Re: Roman Roads (2017)

#56

Post by darkwater »

jajko wrote: post #46

Very schematic from region I live around - Geneva and Aosta are not that far on the map and seem close neighbours, but highest part of alps lies in between, passes can be brutal and far apart (>=2500m high, ie St Bernard pass from where famous dogs come from, can end up snowed anytime all year round and especially 2000 years ago, at least 6 months/year unpassable for carriages and dangerous for anything else).

Well, you know, a subway would pass under the mountains ;)

Re: Roman Roads (2017)

#57

Post by tamimio »

behnamoh wrote: post #10

Sometimes I wonder if we've regressed in terms of attention to quality. Here in the US, I see lots of potholes on the streets and sidewalks. Meanwhile, the ancient cobblestone roads are still functional to this day.

Wait till you see Canadian roads.. But the real reason is construction mafia, to keep their work going, if they made it high quality they are out of government maintenance contracts in the coming years.

Re: Roman Roads (2017)

#60

Post by jacobolus »

madcaptenor wrote: post #51
kevin_thibedeau wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

An easy trick is to rotate hue with a spacing of 1.618. That guarantees maximum separation with no near collisions for any number of hues.

I've heard this one before. It only takes advantage of one dimension of the color space, though, and that bugs me. On the other hand you don't have to go look up a better palette.

Here's a 2-dimensional version where you pick the angles https://observablehq.com/@jrus/categorical

If you want to keep the points theoretically ideally separated out to as many as colors as you want, you can use the "plastic sequence" for your parameters, https://observablehq.com/@jrus/plastic-sequence

Post reply on HN