Yeap they are usable, I do understand a bit of Finnish but the use of icons means that I dont have to understand much. I like the icons you use for the amount and quality of protection (maybe because it is similar to the English system
). Its nice to know how bold a route is before getting on it (you cannot always tell from the ground).
Good to hear that! Never having climbed outsite Finland yet, I was wondering if there's a website that explains the English system. I've heard about it, but I'd be interested to look into it better.
One thing that might increase usability is to have each topo for each crag on there own PDF file. This means you can print of a complete topo easily without having to print off each web page separately (which I have noticed dont always print out so well and it uses a lot of paper).
Yes, the planned English version would be a single PDF file for each cliff. I'm hoping we have the resources to do it some day
The Finnish version we're going to keep as web based hypertext, as it offers more versatility.
My lack of Finnish might have meant I have missed them. Although of course its just my personal opinion, I quite like knowing the height of the crag before I go so i know what I am in for and what gear to take (i.e. rope, number of quickdraws etc). Maybe the height of each route would be overkill, maybe just the rough height of each sector of the crags next to their names?
I had a word with our topo team and it seems likely that we're going to put the overall height of each crag on the front page. We also consider putting the height of each sector on the topo. We'll see into that when the 2006 season begins
Thanks for this idea!
Not at all, thanks for putting in the large effort required to clean and record new crags. Also, although I am not against sport routes, I admire the fact that you have kept them as all trad crags.
Glad to hear that