world peace and the perfect location editing widget

[Rick Walsh]

Hi,

On 18 July 2015 at 06:47, Salvador Cuñat <salvador.cunat at gmail.com> wrote:

> Good night.
>
> 2015-07-17 19:38 GMT+02:00, Dirk Hohndel <dirk at hohndel.org>:
> > On Fri, Jul 17, 2015 at 10:27:19AM -0700, Dirk Hohndel wrote:
> >
> > Having said all this, yes, the patch fixes the bug. So to those of you
> > considering testing this (you ARE going to test this, right? after all
> the
> > fighting and yelling...) - please pull the latest master or get the -1141
> > daily builds that are being created as I speak.
> >
>

I just tested with the lastest master.

Tomaz and Dirk, thank you very much for implementing this.  A few days ago
I doubted it would be possible to develop a solution that everybody would
keep everybody happy.  I think it is great.  Hopefully there'll be feedback
from both sides of the "duplicate site names are stupid" vs "coordinates
for different parts of a site are important to me" debate.

As all my dives already have locations, I tested by copying my file,
deleting my 15 most recent dives, then re-downloading them from my dive
computer.  At first I was suprised that there was no option to autocomplete
the name without assigning the existing site.  But on re-assigning a site
to a dive (so the dive currently already has a location), that option
appears.  I assume that's what will happen if the companion app is used and
the dive has a GPS fix but is not assigned a site.  That logic is very
clever at predicting a user's intention.  It would be great to get the
opinion of Linus and others who want multiple sites sharing the same name.

A couple of suggestions relating to the drop-down list:
(1) get rid of the space between the ~ and the distance.  I'm guessing a
trivial fix.  E.g. ~365km away rather than ~ 365km away
(2) also provide the number of dives at the existing site to make it easy
to tell the difference between the usual location (e.g. primary mooring)
and the alternate location.  Or in my case, the dive site I'm using for all
my other dives here, and the 'ghost' dive site that no longer has any dives
assigned to it, but I haven't been able to delete from my log.  Hopefully
not too hard to implement.  E.g. ~365km away, 14 previous dives


>
> Hmmm, summer, weekend, diving perspective ...  Not sure there will be
> a lot of testing ;-)
>
> The patch worked for me too.  Thanks Tomaz.
> There is an annoying thing i didn't realize yesterday (or may be it
> wasn't there):
> While typing, and a word is completed, the drop down list closes and
> your typing is stucked for a moment. When a new word beggins the list
> opens again and so on.
>

I noticed this too, but only after reading Salvador's email.  Until reading
his email I hadn't bothered completing words, and just selected the site I
wanted before I had finished typing the first word.  Hopefully it isn't too
hard to fix.


>
> Globally, I think it will be a great functionality once "Manage dive
> sites" gets working.
>
>
Yes, I'm patiently waiting for this feature too.  I've cleaned up my log
and am deliberately not using duplicate locations for the same site, but
it's not possible to delete the ghost sites that are left in my .ssrf file,
except by opening the file in a text editor.  As well as the ability to:
 add notes to a site, and reassign its coordinates (feature we had briefly
with the pop-up dive site editor), I would love the option to:
(1) delete unused sites
(2) reassign coordinates with help of Marble (feature we had briefly with
the pop-up dive site editor)
(3) add notes to a site (feature we had briefly with the pop-up dive site
editor)
(4) merge sites with close locations, regardless of name
(5) merge sites with close-ish locations and same or similar name (e.g.
Lighthouse vs Lighthouse (Malapascua)).  I might have a GPS fix for one,
whereas the other time I just guessed by clicking on the map but was
actually hundreds of metres off.
(6) merge sites with same/similar names where one has GPS fix and the other
doesn't.
(7) get georeferencing for all sites that don't already have it.

I think points (1) and (2) are crucial.  The rest are my wishlist.

For merging sites, I think the logic should be:
- if the sites name are different, let the user select the name they want
for the merged site
- if one site has coordinate/notes and the other doesn't, take the data we
have
- if both sites have (different) coordinates, let the user choose - ideally
by showing both in marble and the user click on the desired site
- if both sites have notes, let the user choose one or the other, or take
text from both.

Cheers,

Rick
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.subsurface-divelog.org/pipermail/subsurface/attachments/20150718/82a7a5e9/attachment.html>