[offline Markers] Including A Size Variable

[+ibycus]

Its been brought up within our group that including a field for size might be a good idea. On setting up the category, I purposely avoided this, as I didn't want to ask people a question that they wouldn't know how to answer (I have trouble estimating anything above about 4 acres). By asking this question, I was worried about missing out on potential submissions.

 

What do people think of something along the lines of:

 

( ) Extra Small (not enough room to toss a ball around)

( ) Small (Enough room to toss a ball around if its not too busy)

( ) Medium (Allows for a reasonable walk, but you'll probably do mostly the same walk every time you come)

( ) Large (One of several walks possible, will take more than one visit to explore the whole park)

( ) Extra Large (Many walks possible, will take many visits to explore entire park)

 

I think this should cover most off leash parks out there, and a reasonable degree of discrimination between them.

 

(oh, and if you'd like to join the group, just let me know, I'll let you in, I'll even make you an officer once you've successfully submitted a few waymarks)

[+ChapterhouseInc]

yes, this might be a good variable, allowing you to choose which park you want to visit.

 

it just seems sort of subjective though. i just 'tossed' the ball with my dog in the kitchen--i am sure it is smaller than any dog park. should some sort of 'suggestive' dimensions for each category be supplied?

 

how about a variable for how many dogs are in at the same time as well....

 

there is a park here that has 3 different 'areas' comparable to a back yard--you can do what ever you want in the space--and only the 'dogs you bring' are in the fenced area.

 

another park has two similar sized areas, the smaller for small dogs and the larger for big dogs.

 

yet another park has a football field sized area for everyone to use.

 

so then should there be a 'public' or 'private' variable?

[+The Blue Quasar]

Those look good to me.

 

I know, I should get a dog too

 

Good definitions for the Variables.

 

The Blue Quasar

[+Hike!]

I personally think that getting the coordinates is the hardest part about creating a waymark for most people. Once you've gone to that effort it's pretty trivial to answer a few questions about it. I really think that people often just don't know what information is pertinent unless prompted. For example, as you mentioned to me, if parks in your area are all free it might not occur to you that others aren't.

 

The guidlines you came up with for size are pretty close, though. These descriptions are always rather subjective, and still require some thought on the user's part. For example, our local park is about 15 acres, which I consider large based on most of the parks I have seen. I has well-defined gravel paths, however, so most people walk the same route every time.

 

I'd rather see something than nothing, however, so if others think they are ok then lets just do it.

 

A few other size measures might include:

 

Medium: takes more than 5 minutes to walk the perimeter

Large: takes 15 minutes or more to walk the perimeter

Extra Large: you could get lost in there

 

Another way might be to use familiar things like, "about the size of a football field". Most parks I've vistited are in the medium to small category.

 

Just my thoughts...

 

Hike!

[+ibycus]

yes, this might be a good variable, allowing you to choose which park you want to visit.

 

it just seems sort of subjective though. i just 'tossed' the ball with my dog in the kitchen--i am sure it is smaller than any dog park. should some sort of 'suggestive' dimensions for each category be supplied?

 

Good point about the 'tossing a ball' thing. Maybe room to throw a frisbee would be better (yes I know in theory you could throw a frisbee in your kitchen, but a frisbee to me implies some kind of minimum distance, whereas a ball you can chuck along the ground)

 

My reason behind avoiding numbers is personally (and I imagine I'm not alone), up until recently I'd have had a hard time estimating even a 1 acre park.

 

Another reason (that I just thought of), is what units do you use? We've all been talking about acres here, but I know a lot of areas don't use acres.

 

Also, sometimes the absolute size isn't really the most important aspect of the park. A park may be *huge*, but really what good does that do you if the area that is practically accessible is pretty small.

 

A smaller park, criss-crossed with trails may have a larger *effective* area than a larger park with fewer trails.

 

how about a variable for how many dogs are in at the same time as well....

 

there is a park here that has 3 different 'areas' comparable to a back yard--you can do what ever you want in the space--and only the 'dogs you bring' are in the fenced area.

 

I think this is something that probably fits best in the description field, rather than a variable. If something like that is the case for a park you're listing, I would imagine it would be something you would think about mentioning. If its something that is the same for all the parks in you're area, (and hence you don't think about it), I'd imagine it wouldn't really matter to a visitor anyways (as all the parks in the area are that way).

 

another park has two similar sized areas, the smaller for small dogs and the larger for big dogs.

 

Actually there is a variable for that... I put it in, because I figured it was something you might not think of if you don't use the 'small dog' area, but if you have a small dog you might want to search on.

[+ibycus]

I personally think that getting the coordinates is the hardest part about creating a waymark for most people.

 

Actually for me that was the easiest part for the ones I have listed. Most of them are based on google earth....

 

The guidlines you came up with for size are pretty close, though. These descriptions are always rather subjective, and still require some thought on the user's part. For example, our local park is about 15 acres, which I consider large based on most of the parks I have seen. I has well-defined gravel paths, however, so most people walk the same route every time.

 

Its funny, trying to picture a 15 acre park in my mind, makes me think about what I had in mind for medium.

 

The more I look at this category, the more thankful I am to live in Calgary. Most of our parks are probably larger than 15 acres, but there is significant variation among the sizes. I'd say the smallest I've seen would fit in the 'extra small' category, most would go in the medium category, and one or two would go in the large category.

 

What would you think about just removing the "Small-medium-large" designator, and leaving it with the descriptors. Where would most of the parks fit then?

 

I'd rather see something than nothing, however, so if others think they are ok then lets just do it.

 

I think I'm probably in the minority as far as not wanting to put a fixed number on the size....

 

A few other size measures might include:

 

Medium: takes more less? than 5 minutes to walk the perimeter

Large: takes 15 minutes or more to walk the perimeter

Extra Large: you could get lost in there

 

Another way might be to use familiar things like, "about the size of a football field". Most parks I've vistited are in the medium to small category.

 

Its funny, most parks around here would fit in to the Large Category with those designators, and you'd probably think they were large, although for here they would probably be medium. Actually most around here would probably take an hour at least to walk the perimeter, but you probably couldn't get lost in there...

 

How big is a football field anyways? I have some idea, but I don't know (haven't been to/seen a football game in many many years)

 

Actually now that I think about it, it might be interesting to have an optional numerical input field for approximate size in acres, along with a required descriptive size. I'd love to be able to compare park size by region.

[+Hike!]

I could see your idea of small, medium, and large, with an optional text box for further description. Then people could use whatever number or comparison they relate to best.

 

BTW, and American Football field (not soccer) is 100 yards (91.44 Meters) by 50 yards (45.72 Meters), or a little over an acre in size. Adult Soccer fields are usually a little wider (60-80 yards if I'm not mistaken).

 

I too would like to see how dog park sizes vary. Ideally, people would just provide more information in their descriptions, but that's probably asking too much. Size does matter to me when it comes to dog parks. My dog needs space to get a good run, and smaller parks tend to get way too crowded.

 

How about a little more light-hearted size description:

 

X-small (typical back yard)

Small (about a Football field or 1 acre)

Medium (enough room to go for a good walk)

Large (I can see another dog waaay over there)

X-Large (we should all be so lucky)

 

Then a text box for those who actually know how big the park is.

 

Hike!