locations and coordinates
dirk at hohndel.org
Tue May 6 08:14:29 PDT 2014
On Tue, 2014-05-06 at 08:07 -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Tue, May 6, 2014 at 7:23 AM, Dirk Hohndel <dirk at hohndel.org> wrote:
> > If a user types in a location name that is already in the divelist and
> > has GPS coordinates, then those coordinates are set for the new dive.
> > But if a user has many dives with the same (non-empty) location name,
> > and none of those dives has coordinates, then setting the coordinates
> > for one of those dives... should that populate the coordinates for all
> > of those dives?
> I'm not 100% sure what we ended up doing in the gtk branch, but I
> think we ended up deciding against that.
We did, and I now (after another coffee) even remember the reason:
we said that we should not modify dives that aren't selected. And that
makes perfect sense.
> The fear is that a dive site name might not be unique (think "boat
> dive off Maui" for when you forget what the dive site was called), and
> populating old things with a new GPS may just be entirely misleading.
> For example, I have a number of dives that just say "Okinawa" or
> "Ambergis Caye, Belize" because I was bad at tracking dive site names.
> And you can set things manually easily enough if you want to: just
> sort by location, selecting them all, and then editing the dive and
> setting the gps location that way.
Exactly. Except that's partially broken right now as well (complicated
story - Tom discovered it and trying to figure out what's wrong got me
started on thinking about all this again)
> Btw, tangentially related to that, and checking: looking at the Qt
> version, that's no longer as easy as it used to be. Dives with
> location information used to have a marker on them in the dive list,
> now they don't. So it's not nearly as easy to select dives without gps
> info as it used to be.
> That marker was horrible because of how you interacted with it (click
> to get map), but it was visually a good thing. Maybe we could have
> something like that in the location field.
Not for 4.1, but yes, I agree. That was useful.
More information about the subsurface