[PATCH] Show single dives in map.
Henrik Brautaset Aronsen
henrik at synth.no
Fri Jan 18 14:23:18 PST 2013
One point per dive is just stupid, I don't really think anyone would want
Den 18. jan. 2013 22:41 skrev "Jef Driesen" <jefdriesen at telenet.be>
> On 2013-01-16 17:40, Dirk Hohndel wrote:
>> It turns out that different divers and different types of dives have
>> extremely different characteristics.
>> Some divers do lots and lots and lots of dives at exactly the same dive
>> location. I literally have 50+ dives that are exactly at the same spot -
>> it's the training facility I work with that has a house right on Hood
>> Canal in Washington State and we always dive right in front of the
>> Other divers do mostly boat dives where usually every dive has a
>> different GPS coordinate. Funnily enough, I have more than a hundred
>> dives of that flavor.
>> And there are many other options (like the "same site, but not exactly
>> the same spot" you mention above).
>> So far I decided not to try to over engineer things. I put the coarse
>> location ("Hoodsport, WA, USA" or "Larnaca, Zyprus") in the trip
>> location and the name of the actual site in the dive location. And then
>> want to have GPS coordinates attached to the specific dives (where
> I don't have any GPS info for my dives, but if I did, I think I would
> prefer to have it attached to the dive site, not each dive.
> For shore dives, this shouldn't pose any problems, because the entry point
> is quite straightforward. For boat dives it's indeed a bit more tricky.
> However, I assume most boat dives are done at either a reef or a wreck, and
> not just some random place. I agree that the point of entry won't always be
> exactly the same, but do people care about that level of precision? For
> example at a reef, you usually have the name of the reef (e.g. Apo Island).
> The typical entry points also have their own name added (e.g. North, East,
> Rock, etc). While you can start the dive about everywhere on the reef, I
> would log the dive at the nearest "official" dive site and not the exact
> entry point (e.g. GPS position). Also for plotting dive sites on a map, I
> think it's convenient to have just one dot per dive site, rater than having
> one dot per dive squattered around at roughly the same area. (If you want
> an indication of the number of dives at a particular site, you can for
> example scale the dots accordingly.)
> I wonder if there are any people doing this different, and actually prefer
> the exact GPS location at each dive.
> subsurface mailing list
> subsurface at hohndel.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the subsurface