I haven't bagged any mountains in this area too. I was thinking the other day that an area for the Ariège region (Arieja) was also missing. Do you consider it as being a part of this region or distinct ? I have not been on many peaks except a couple but I was thinking about preparing a short overview of the region to link future peaks. What do you think ?
yes, I think it's a good idea. When I wrote the page of Pyrenees I wrote a title for Ariege call Haute Ariége in the French side without link because it didn't existed but it was thought as area. The structure was thought in two areas in both sides, French and Spanish side, around a map 1:50.000.
List of French side (with name "Pyrénées: area"):
-Pays Basque West (Labourd-Basse Navarre)
-Pays Basque East (Barétous-Soule-Basse Navarre)
-Béarn
---Vignemale Massif (attached to Ordesa-Gavarnie and Tena as well)
-Bigorre
-Luchon
-Couserans
-Haute Ariége or Ariége
-Capcir
-Fénouilledes
-Roussillon
Only Bearn, Bigorre and Luchon have page on SP nowadays. It's not the bible, it's only a sugerence of structure but a page about Ariége will be welcome.
Perhaps a mapping of the Pyrenees, as they did for the Eastern Alps, would be useful ? I noticed there are a lot of ambiguities with peaks located both in the Gavarnie area and Bigorre area, for example. The borther between Bielsa, Prepirineo and Ordessa is also kind of unprecise. What do you think ? Perhaps we could make a Google map with each sector and enbed it in the main page ?
The map is a good idea. I will think about it. In my opinion it's better a map with the sectors paints and with links to the areas. I didn't made when I wrote the page of Pyrenees because it existed only two or three areas but the number is bigger now.
The border always has a lot of ambiguities in all the places. It's not really important in the mountains. The most important thing is to put the peak in the areas where you can climb it to know which map you must buy. If you has a trailhead in Bigorre and another in Gavarnie for the same peak you add the peak to both areas, but the real border don't exists, even the maps contains the same places (for example the West of Luchon is the same at East of map of Bigorre in the maps 1:50.000 of Rando editions). The area is only a help for the climb but it don't really matter if it's precise or not in my opinion. I don't like very much the pages of areas when I have a lot of peaks still to write. I wrote areas when were necessary for the peaks.
I think you've summarized it quite well, and choosing areas in the Pyrenees is very tricky as it is a very compact range, with too few individualized groups like in the Alps for example.
There is the choice between trying to divide them by subranges, like it was done for the Eastern Alps, but I think it will result in tricky combinations with difficult names if we apply it to the whole range.
There is the opposite method which consists in taking historical regions, which tend to correspond to valleys, but has the inconvenient that peaks precisely divide such areas, and will subsequently often belong to 2 or more areas in the same time. There is the "map" system as you described too, corresponds more or less to the latter, however areas covered by maps sometimes vary amongst editors.
And finally in SP there is the fact that there is a very high contrast of density of coverage of some areas compared to others... (generally the West is much more described than the East)
Considering all these facts, I think the system as it is, is not so bad, and perhaps we should continue to develop "areas" into two methods as it was done so far :
- Historical regions, because the names speak to people (everyone knows "Bearn", "Ariege", "Aragon")
- Smaller areas for precise complex ranges like it is already for Perdido, Vignemale, etc...
As for the map, a BMP for sure is very nice to watch, but it is very difficult and time-consuming to implement. And each time there is a new area you need to redraw it. Recently Google maps have improved a lot with many new features, you can draw lines and shapes on it, you can put names and links to places just like it would be done for a BMP. People can zoom it, unzoom it, scroll (400km is a big range and I'm not sure if we will easily fit such BMP map in a single page), put satellite or terrain view, watch roads, etc etc.
And another great advantage is that you can update it any time you want, and share it with other people (other contributors like you, Eza, Diego, etc). If you look at the Sudetes range, I've started to implement such maps, however it is very basic, and it is possible to do something much nicer for the Pyrenees. Just think of it and tell me what do you think. Perhaps I'll start one of these days to draw such map according to the Pyrenees were subdivised so far, and perhaps you'll like it ;)
Have a nice day and good week end !
Eric
Lucky you ! do you have young children Rafa ? ;)
As for me, little time out to mountains, but from time to time, lots at work - like today. have a look to the Ariège ;)
Great!
Can you change the name to Pyrénées: Ariège?
It's the name in the areas of French side according with my explanation of main page: French side (with name "Pyrénées: area").
The Spanish areas have the name Pirineos: area.
Sure ! For the moment the page is only a draft (custom object). I need to put more pictures.
If you want, for the other french regions (Bigorre, Béarn, etc) I can try to write some similar overviews, "getting there", cultural part, etc etc. For the spanish side, I know a bit less.
thanks, it's a good idea
I add you as "admin" in the three French areas: Bearn, Bigorre, Luchon. You can add a little bit of text about cultural part if you want.
Note: I added a few of pictures of your "old friend" Anayet.
visentin - May 19, 2010 2:43 am - Hasn't voted
unfortunatelyI haven't bagged any mountains in this area too. I was thinking the other day that an area for the Ariège region (Arieja) was also missing. Do you consider it as being a part of this region or distinct ? I have not been on many peaks except a couple but I was thinking about preparing a short overview of the region to link future peaks. What do you think ?
Rafa Bartolome - May 19, 2010 11:07 am - Hasn't voted
Re: unfortunatelyyes, I think it's a good idea. When I wrote the page of Pyrenees I wrote a title for Ariege call Haute Ariége in the French side without link because it didn't existed but it was thought as area. The structure was thought in two areas in both sides, French and Spanish side, around a map 1:50.000.
List of French side (with name "Pyrénées: area"):
-Pays Basque West (Labourd-Basse Navarre)
-Pays Basque East (Barétous-Soule-Basse Navarre)
-Béarn
---Vignemale Massif (attached to Ordesa-Gavarnie and Tena as well)
-Bigorre
-Luchon
-Couserans
-Haute Ariége or Ariége
-Capcir
-Fénouilledes
-Roussillon
Only Bearn, Bigorre and Luchon have page on SP nowadays. It's not the bible, it's only a sugerence of structure but a page about Ariége will be welcome.
visentin - May 20, 2010 2:31 am - Hasn't voted
Re: unfortunatelyPerhaps a mapping of the Pyrenees, as they did for the Eastern Alps, would be useful ? I noticed there are a lot of ambiguities with peaks located both in the Gavarnie area and Bigorre area, for example. The borther between Bielsa, Prepirineo and Ordessa is also kind of unprecise. What do you think ? Perhaps we could make a Google map with each sector and enbed it in the main page ?
Rafa Bartolome - May 20, 2010 2:35 pm - Hasn't voted
Re: unfortunatelyThe map is a good idea. I will think about it. In my opinion it's better a map with the sectors paints and with links to the areas. I didn't made when I wrote the page of Pyrenees because it existed only two or three areas but the number is bigger now.
The border always has a lot of ambiguities in all the places. It's not really important in the mountains. The most important thing is to put the peak in the areas where you can climb it to know which map you must buy. If you has a trailhead in Bigorre and another in Gavarnie for the same peak you add the peak to both areas, but the real border don't exists, even the maps contains the same places (for example the West of Luchon is the same at East of map of Bigorre in the maps 1:50.000 of Rando editions). The area is only a help for the climb but it don't really matter if it's precise or not in my opinion. I don't like very much the pages of areas when I have a lot of peaks still to write. I wrote areas when were necessary for the peaks.
visentin - May 21, 2010 2:43 am - Hasn't voted
Re: unfortunatelyI think you've summarized it quite well, and choosing areas in the Pyrenees is very tricky as it is a very compact range, with too few individualized groups like in the Alps for example.
There is the choice between trying to divide them by subranges, like it was done for the Eastern Alps, but I think it will result in tricky combinations with difficult names if we apply it to the whole range.
There is the opposite method which consists in taking historical regions, which tend to correspond to valleys, but has the inconvenient that peaks precisely divide such areas, and will subsequently often belong to 2 or more areas in the same time. There is the "map" system as you described too, corresponds more or less to the latter, however areas covered by maps sometimes vary amongst editors.
And finally in SP there is the fact that there is a very high contrast of density of coverage of some areas compared to others... (generally the West is much more described than the East)
Considering all these facts, I think the system as it is, is not so bad, and perhaps we should continue to develop "areas" into two methods as it was done so far :
- Historical regions, because the names speak to people (everyone knows "Bearn", "Ariege", "Aragon")
- Smaller areas for precise complex ranges like it is already for Perdido, Vignemale, etc...
As for the map, a BMP for sure is very nice to watch, but it is very difficult and time-consuming to implement. And each time there is a new area you need to redraw it. Recently Google maps have improved a lot with many new features, you can draw lines and shapes on it, you can put names and links to places just like it would be done for a BMP. People can zoom it, unzoom it, scroll (400km is a big range and I'm not sure if we will easily fit such BMP map in a single page), put satellite or terrain view, watch roads, etc etc.
And another great advantage is that you can update it any time you want, and share it with other people (other contributors like you, Eza, Diego, etc). If you look at the Sudetes range, I've started to implement such maps, however it is very basic, and it is possible to do something much nicer for the Pyrenees. Just think of it and tell me what do you think. Perhaps I'll start one of these days to draw such map according to the Pyrenees were subdivised so far, and perhaps you'll like it ;)
Have a nice day and good week end !
Eric
Rafa Bartolome - May 21, 2010 8:27 am - Hasn't voted
Re: unfortunatelythanks
if you could make a google map of Pyrenees it will be welcome
I will try to draw a simple map with the name of the valleys-maps but I don't have time... I'm climbing mountains when I don't work, he,he
visentin - May 21, 2010 9:01 am - Hasn't voted
Re: unfortunatelyLucky you ! do you have young children Rafa ? ;)
As for me, little time out to mountains, but from time to time, lots at work - like today. have a look to the Ariège ;)
Rafa Bartolome - May 27, 2010 4:18 pm - Hasn't voted
Re: unfortunatelyGreat!
Can you change the name to Pyrénées: Ariège?
It's the name in the areas of French side according with my explanation of main page: French side (with name "Pyrénées: area").
The Spanish areas have the name Pirineos: area.
visentin - May 28, 2010 2:51 am - Hasn't voted
Re: unfortunatelySure ! For the moment the page is only a draft (custom object). I need to put more pictures.
If you want, for the other french regions (Bigorre, Béarn, etc) I can try to write some similar overviews, "getting there", cultural part, etc etc. For the spanish side, I know a bit less.
Rafa Bartolome - Jun 26, 2010 3:07 pm - Hasn't voted
Re: unfortunatelythanks, it's a good idea
I add you as "admin" in the three French areas: Bearn, Bigorre, Luchon. You can add a little bit of text about cultural part if you want.
Note: I added a few of pictures of your "old friend" Anayet.
visentin - Jun 28, 2010 4:07 am - Hasn't voted
Re: unfortunatelyThanks. I'll do it slowly, when I have time. I think I'll begin with Bigorre which is the one I know the most.