Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

Kawhi_Leonard_ t1_j42s50t wrote

The water needs a different color or you need a border, Chile and Bolivia just dissolve and you can't really tell where the actual border is.

19

voleibol7 t1_j45zkva wrote

The map is about tree density, no elevated earth masses, so if there are as many trees in those places as there are in the ocean, I think the map does its job

1

cyberentomology t1_j44w94b wrote

Borders are largely irrelevant here, this is not a political map.

0

Kawhi_Leonard_ t1_j45t1do wrote

That's not the point. There needs to be a delineation between where the coast ends and the water begins. It can be a border or the water can be a different color, doesn't matter.

1

symmy546 OP t1_j42s87j wrote

Kind of the point

−38

Kawhi_Leonard_ t1_j42u2sz wrote

I don't think that's helpful or even looks good. If the point is so people can see where there are and aren't forests, now you can't because the shoreline just melts into nothingness. It's really bad practice to use a color that will fade into your background.

16

symmy546 OP t1_j42u79r wrote

Bad practice...... Says who?

−39

Kawhi_Leonard_ t1_j42ujbs wrote

I just clearly told why I think it is bad practice, it makes it impossible to tell how forested the coastlines are.

14