That second bigger view is worse and not because you opened up the view (that's a plus), but because you don't have clear divisions among tiles. Another even more serious flaw, you absolutely must show the tile numbers!
Take those tiles in that row just to the left of the yellow and red limit. In the first place I wouldn't like to show empty spaces black because then it is not clear they are empty (some tiles are dark, if not black and you won't see the division between them and consequently how they look).
Those corner tiles you have there come in set of four, as these do (if you follow to the left from those limit tiles) each rotated by ninety degrees.
I find it hard enough to focus on this orientation when looking for a tile when they are separated and on white background, like when I want sandy tile with grass in upper right quadrant, which in your view without spaces between tiles is much harder, if not almost, I'd even say pretty well impossible. I mean in practice.
There is some grouping of tiles present in the libraires as they are, the empty spaces already mark 'tile sets' in Wemade libraries but your're right, that still leaves lots to be desired. For example, off the top of my head, some brown ground tiles are found at #s ~950 but for no good reason. When I want some particular looking tiles, I look at existing maps for them and note the tile number/location to look them up in library. That's the only reasonable way to go about it, unless you go in and hope your luck is high and that you run into something you want to use. That's why including tile numbers is absolutely essential.
In Shanda libraries, spaces typically mark the start of next tile column on a map since their maps are not made up from modular (reusable) tiles, in many cases anyway.
I take it, you can code and if so, why not work on the map editor we already have?
