Location, location, location

[Rodrigo Severo]

On Wed, Jul 15, 2015 at 10:45 AM, Dirk Hohndel <dirk at hohndel.org> wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 15, 2015 at 10:27:16AM -0300, Rodrigo Severo wrote:
>> 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 that was exactly what I had proposed. So I agree.
>
>> 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).
>
> I completely agree. If the user wants to create a new site, just type it
> in. If they want to use an existing site, pick it from the auto
> completion. Easy, consistent, doesn't waste screen real estate.

Linus, are you ready to acknowledge that it's just not worth the
trouble to use autocomplete to save a few keystrokes when getting the
same name for a different dive site?


Rodrigo Severo