"John Gorentz" <
[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> The [Universal] maps for some parts of the state have more information (and a more aesthetically
> pleasing format) than others.
>
> I think I even know what part of the state their main cartographer comes from, but the
> UniversalMap people won't help me confirm it. I was once amazed at the level of historical detail
> that was shown on one of the maps. ... Afterwards I e-mailed to the UniversalMap people,
> commenting on the level of historical detail, wanting to find out who it was who knew and cared
> about all these places. They wouldn't tell me, just saying that it was done under contract, and
> something to the effect that it was proprietary information. As I've studied these maps more
> closely since then, I've concluded that one part of the state has a lot more of this level of
> detail than any of the others do, so I'm now slightly less impressed. I figure the person must
> know his/her home area very well. I still wish I could meet him/her.
If you ever find this phantom Universal cartographer, pass along my compliments as well. I've
only used the ones on the west side of the lower peninsula, but I have found them great for
bicycle touring.
They contain street names, they contain paving information, there are little ridge lines showing
hills, they show little roads, they have detail for towns of any size, and you can tell paved from
gravel (and those wonderful dirt "seasonal roads" in northwest Michigan).