Should we merge some of the large areas in font together? e.g. Franchard Cuisiniere + Franchard Isatis + ... into a single Franchard area. Similar with Apremenot. Potentially cuvier?
It feels like one of the main advantages of smaller areas is they're easier to describe in a guidebook. CH is not a guide though, so grouping together into larger areas could make sense.
On the other hand people might be familiar with the sub-areas from guides and so look for those specifically, and if they're missing it could be confusing.
i'd think not, copying bleau.info before in having these separate.
I don't think we should do that for Font. Unlike Stanage, if you said 'Franchard' most people wouldn't know where that was. If you said Isatis or Cuisinière, that's much more helpful and understandable. They also feel very separate, being in the forest and miles apart, whereas Stanage is a continuous feature.
Im kinda on the fence so happy to go with the majority decision, but just to play devil's advocate to me they don't feel like discontinuous features. They are just collections of boulders of course so not such a clear feature as stanage, but to my mind cuvier follows a clear ridge line through the forest. Similarly with apremont. I wouldn't say Franchard is massively spread out either, it is a big area but you can walk between all the sectors and never be more than a few hundred meters from some boulders.
i agree with TdG, no one calls it "Franchard" so bundling all those (there are many) into one area doesn't make sense. What you could do is add "Franchard" as a geographical Area, as https://bleau.info/areas_by_region does