Word for today : "Additional"

[+rutson]

adj: additional 1. existing or coming by way of addition; "an additional problem"; "further information"; "there will be further delays"; "took more time" [syn: further, more] 2. added to complete or make up a deficiency; "produced supplementary volumes"; "additional reading" [syn: supplementary, supplemental] 3. further or added; "called for additional troops"; "need extra help"; "an extra pair of shoes"; "I have no other shoes"; "there are other possibilities" [syn: extra, other] 4. more; "would you like anything else?"; "I have nothing else to say" [syn: else] 5. one more or an added; "another chance"; "another cup of coffee"; "an additional piece of pie" [syn: another]

 

See how all those definitions, although subtly different, mean there's something extra, something more, something you've not got already.

 

So why to cache owners see fit to put another copy of the main coordinates of caches in the additional waypoints?

 

"Ah," I hear you cry, "it's only one or two.... "

 

Well, the survery said....

 

I checked, there are 428 additional waypoints on active UK caches with EXACTLY the same coordinates as the main ones.

 

I particularly enjoyed a set of parking coordinates with the comment:

Don't try and park at the exact coordinates, as these are for the middle of the pond at the location!

 

What's the point?

[+purple_pineapple]

quite!

 

Part of the problem, IMHO, is that we need to put multi coords in as AWs and, as you point out, these are additional. However, as we now know, if they're not in the 'long description' as well, then many people may not have them at all! So are they supposed to be a duplicate of stuff in the long description, which seems a waste of time? Blowed if I'm sitting there typing things out twice...

 

As for the random choice of the two letter prefix, don't even get me started on that!

 

Is there a chance that we in th UK can agree some predefined two letter prefixes and then ask the reviewers to politely request these when new caches are placed?

 

eg

CP for parking

S1, S2 etc for stages...

 

Cheers!

 

Dave

[+currykev]

And additionally I would like to add my comment.It seems strange to me that people are adding the same info twice.And in addition I'd like additional waypoints to also include railway stations.

[+Pharisee]

Until I get told to do something different, as far as additional waypoints are concerned any caches I place in the future will follow the same format as my existing ones...

 

ie...

 

The co-ordinates quoted at the top of the cache page will NOT be duplicated as an additional waypoint. If the quoted co-ordinates are for parking or serve some other function, this will be clearly stated in the Long Description.

 

Any additional waypoints listed will always be described fully in the Long Description.

[+purple_pineapple]

 

Any additional waypoints listed will always be described fully in the Long Description.

 

... not so much additional then...

 

Having said that, if everyone did this then we could avoid a whole lot of hassle with missing clues etc - and while we're at it, we could do away with AWs and use the coord grab feature of GSAK...

 

Note sure if I can be bothered to type it all twice though...

[+Jonovich]

Note sure if I can be bothered to type it all twice though...

 

Cut & Paste!

 

J

[alistair_uk]

This is fun, tomorrow we can do the word "Waypoint" and will discover that a waypoint is not just an acronym for coordinates but a location identifier.

 

Sorry for the sarcasm, but it really annoys me when people use the name "addition waypoints" as a reason not to list tow waypoints in the same location. Okay, now I will try and clarify my point. The same coordinates, including the cache listing coordinates can have multiple purposes. We have no way of flagging each coordinate as a separate thing so the only way to do it is to list multiple waypoints in the same location.

 

Personally I would much rather we did this and kept all the information available. If the user does not want to pull down the information then they do not need to. My personal gripe is having to read the description to see if parking is available when the existence of a parking waypoint on the satnav answers the question. If that is a yard from the cache location, so what.

[+Pharisee]

 

Any additional waypoints listed will always be described fully in the Long Description.

 

... not so much additional then...

 

 

I figured they were additional to the quoted co-ordinates, not additional to the long description

[+kewfriend]

I'm GUILTY .... having been dragged screaming into this additional waypoint thing, I assumed that in a multi all the waypoints had to be listed including the carparking leading to the silly thing of the first waypoint ( or carpark) being just a slither of a digit different from the posted coords.

 

I can cope ... I'm a grown man ... these are just minor stresses ... my doctor assures me no harm will derive.

 

But I would like to suggest that TPTB take a leaf from the google book and seek to simplify and clairfy the interface rather than exacerbate it and complicate it.

 

I love my geocaching but I'm a simple soul - so KISS xxxx

[+purple_pineapple]

 

Any additional waypoints listed will always be described fully in the Long Description.

 

... not so much additional then...

 

 

I figured they were additional to the quoted co-ordinates, not additional to the long description

 

fair point, I bow to your superior argument there Pharisee!

[+Hi-Tek]

adj: additional 1. existing or coming by way of addition; "an additional problem"; "further information"; "there will be further delays"; "took more time" [syn: further, more] 2. added to complete or make up a deficiency; "produced supplementary volumes"; "additional reading" [syn: supplementary, supplemental] 3. further or added; "called for additional troops"; "need extra help"; "an extra pair of shoes"; "I have no other shoes"; "there are other possibilities" [syn: extra, other] 4. more; "would you like anything else?"; "I have nothing else to say" [syn: else] 5. one more or an added; "another chance"; "another cup of coffee"; "an additional piece of pie" [syn: another]

 

See how all those definitions, although subtly different, mean there's something extra, something more, something you've not got already.

 

So why to cache owners see fit to put another copy of the main coordinates of caches in the additional waypoints?

 

"Ah," I hear you cry, "it's only one or two.... "

 

Well, the survery said....

 

I checked, there are 428 additional waypoints on active UK caches with EXACTLY the same coordinates as the main ones.

 

I particularly enjoyed a set of parking coordinates with the comment:

Don't try and park at the exact coordinates, as these are for the middle of the pond at the location!

 

What's the point?

Exactly my sentiments! (BTW I brought this subject up several months ago.)

[Fiona Eliza & Florence]

quite!

 

As for the random choice of the two letter prefix, don't even get me started on that!

 

Is there a chance that we in th UK can agree some predefined two letter prefixes and then ask the reviewers to politely request these when new caches are placed?

 

eg

CP for parking

S1, S2 etc for stages...

 

 

When placing my first cache I found this so confusing. I couldn't believe that such a professional service, as I believe the Groundspeak site is, should rely on me to code for the waypoints. I could put anything I liked in there if I thought it made sense! Daft! So I agree that a set should be agreed to follow. My trouble was made worse by the fact that, by chance, none of the caches I had found before placing my own, had any additional waypoints (I guess coz they were set up before the requirement) so I had nothing to follow.

[Alan White]

I can see this one is going to run and run.

 

There's little point in arguing semantics. AWs aren't consistently so-called, and it's only an inference anyway. And as I've said in previous discussions, an AW has one thing that the main coords don't: it can be typed (as in classified, categorised). This means that automation can determine what to do with the waypoint, in a way which embedding it in text can never do.

 

My view is that the waypoint collection - which is what it's called on the Managing Waypoints (note: not Managing Additional Waypoints ) page - should list, and therefore classify, all the waypoints needed for that cache. Since AWs, it is the main coords which are redundant.

 

However, I'd much rather that all this energy was directed at fixing the real problems we've mentioned elsewhere, rather than worrying about whether the waypoint collection should or shouldn't include the main coords.

[The Royles]

However, I'd much rather that all this energy was directed at fixing the real problems we've mentioned elsewhere, rather than worrying about whether the waypoint collection should or shouldn't include the main coords.

 

Well said that man (or woman named Alan - for the sexist brigade)

[+Learned Gerbil]

As we have always managed previously without the additional waypoints, I interpreted "addtional" as a synonym for "supplementary" meaning "functioning in a subsidiary or supporting capacity".

[+Hi-Tek]

As we have always managed previously without the additional waypoints, I interpreted "addtional" as a synonym for "supplementary" meaning "functioning in a subsidiary or supporting capacity".

Well said that man

[+flipflopnick]

 

Well, the survey said....

 

I checked, there are 428 additional waypoints on active UK caches with EXACTLY the same coordinates as the main ones.

 

 

No longer possible to add waypoint with same coords as main page coords. AW submit page won't allow duplicate coords. I agree with Alistair_uk, AWs can have multiple uses.

 

Also some people use presence of AW parking coords, to filter cache search. i.e. exclude those without stated parking. So I give parking coords to save others the hassle of finding parking.

[+Hi-Tek]

No longer possible to add waypoint with same coords as main page coords. AW submit page won't allow duplicate coords. I agree with Alistair_uk, AWs can have multiple uses.

Great news - Jeremy did say he was looking at this problem some time ago and it seems he's been as good as his word. Well done Jeremy

 

Nothing wrong with AWs as long as they aren't the same as the main cache co-ords.

 

It's been said before but "additional" means "additional" - not the "same as" the cache co-ords and Groundspeak seem to agree that this is how they perceive it.

[+rutson]

I take it then that those caches with 'additional' coordinates the same as the main ones will have them removed? Or at least the owners contacted requesting that they do?

[+Learned Gerbil]

I notice that people have started posting the coordinates of puzzles as parking, then posting an AW with the coordinates changed by one digit as an appropriate place to park. Aaaaaaghh! Will this nonsense ever end!

[Alan White]

Will this nonsense ever end!

I expect it will end when the nonsense of the current data model is ended, and the model satisfies the requirements without needing to be fudged.

 

It's one of the biggest truisms in IT that if you design the application poorly the users will adapt it to meet their needs. That's what's happening here.

[+KiwiGary]

One of my pet hates in trads that also have a additional way point which says "cache location"?

 

Never understood that one?

 

As for multis I tend to make the main co-ordinates the first clue, not the parking. As not everyone starts a multi from the carpark. Remember some people don't have cars.

 

I don't know how many times when I was on the bike, I ended up in a carpark looking for a clue or micro??? Yes I know I should read the whole cache page first

 

See ya...Gary

[+purple_pineapple]

I saw a trad yesterday where the top coords were for parking and the first line of the cache page stated the trad was not at the above coords, and then gave the coords for the box - shurely the wrong way round, especially from some well known cachers who should know better! lol

 

And nope, I won't "name and shame" but would an e-mail be appropriate? they are much more experienced than us relative newbies!

 

Dave

[Dave from Glanton]

I saw a trad yesterday where the top coords were for parking and the first line of the cache page stated the trad was not at the above coords, and then gave the coords for the box - shurely the wrong way round, especially from some well known cachers who should know better! lol

 

And nope, I won't "name and shame" but would an e-mail be appropriate? they are much more experienced than us relative newbies!

 

Dave

That does sound the wrong was around to me (in fact, I'm suprised that the reviewers didn't question this when the cache was published)

If you want to email them, you could always use the opening gambit of "I may be being a bit dense here, but what was your logic for..." which is a bit more diplomatic than just saying "I think you have it wrong"

[+purple_pineapple]

I saw a trad yesterday where the top coords were for parking and the first line of the cache page stated the trad was not at the above coords, and then gave the coords for the box - shurely the wrong way round, especially from some well known cachers who should know better! lol

 

And nope, I won't "name and shame" but would an e-mail be appropriate? they are much more experienced than us relative newbies!

 

Dave

That does sound the wrong was around to me (in fact, I'm suprised that the reviewers didn't question this when the cache was published)

If you want to email them, you could always use the opening gambit of "I may be being a bit dense here, but what was your logic for..." which is a bit more diplomatic than just saying "I think you have it wrong"

 

nice opening gambit, think I'll use that one!