Location, location, location

[Rodrigo Severo]

On Wed, Jul 15, 2015 at 10:15 AM, Henrik Brautaset Aronsen
<subsurface at henrik.synth.no> wrote:
>
> The autocompleted "Blue Corner - Create dive site with this name" is not
> useful IMHO.  How often would you create a new site with the exact same name
> as one that is already existing?  I think this would only create confusion.

I agree with you but apparently this feature is considered VERY USEFUL
by others.

I think it's not really useful because either:

1. it's a common AND simple name like Blue Corner so why bother saving
the trouble of retyping "Blue Corner";
2. it's a long and difficult to type name and so it's NOT common and
probably won't be used twice.

IMHO, the autocomplete should always autocomplete to help select an
already existing dive site, whenever this already existing dive site
has GPS coordinates or not. If the user doesn't use autocomplete, a
new dive site would be created.

And as Tomaz just mentioned:

> Well, Take a look about linus rant from yesterday, in the other location e-mail.
> He stated that "There are many dive sites with same names, for instance "Turtle Reel" or "Blue Hole" so he wanted to
> have a way to autocomplete the name without copying the dive site coordinates.

The examples that Linus presented that actually repeat are common,
small and simple. (case 1 above).

That long dive site name Linus mentioned from Brazil won't ever be
used anywhere else in the world (case 2 above).

Really, autocomplete to just get the same (small and simple) name for
a new site is silly and confusing. Autocomplete should be restricted
to selecting an already existing dive site (which might already have
GPS coordinates or not).


Rodrigo Severo