+Super_Nate Posted January 29, 2007 Posted January 29, 2007 So I know this is a little minor....and is an easy fix, but it is something that has been bothering me for a long time. Since we have 7-digit waypoint codes now......who thinks the "View a Cache Listing" box on the right-hand pane of the front page of GC.com needs another "X"
+TotemLake Posted January 30, 2007 Posted January 30, 2007 So I know this is a little minor....and is an easy fix, but it is something that has been bothering me for a long time. Since we have 7-digit waypoint codes now......who thinks the "View a Cache Listing" box on the right-hand pane of the front page of GC.com needs another "X" Only a programmer or engineer would make that an issue.
+Super_Nate Posted January 30, 2007 Author Posted January 30, 2007 So I know this is a little minor....and is an easy fix, but it is something that has been bothering me for a long time. Since we have 7-digit waypoint codes now......who thinks the "View a Cache Listing" box on the right-hand pane of the front page of GC.com needs another "X" Only a programmer or engineer would make that an issue. Programers and engineers exsist on our site....so I don't think it is going to hurt us my merely adding an "X"
+Bundyrumandcoke Posted January 30, 2007 Posted January 30, 2007 Well, If you want my opinion, GCXXXXX would be fine in the search box, if you are looking for a new cache with 7 characters, but no good if you are looking for one with only 6 characters or older, too many X's. So perhaps the search box should have numerous alternative search options, eg GCXXXXX, GCXXXX, GCXXX ect. Just my 2 cents worth. Also proves you cant please all the people all the time.
+Super_Nate Posted January 30, 2007 Author Posted January 30, 2007 Well, If you want my opinion, GCXXXXX would be fine in the search box, if you are looking for a new cache with 7 characters, but no good if you are looking for one with only 6 characters or older, too many X's. So perhaps the search box should have numerous alternative search options, eg GCXXXXX, GCXXXX, GCXXX ect. Just my 2 cents worth. Also proves you cant please all the people all the time. Good point....it may not really matter, but it is something that kept catching my eye! For everyday that goes by, their is going to be more and more people searching for 7-digit waypoint codes.....their will be less people searching for 6-digit waypoint codes because they are slowly going to be getting archived off. Same reason why we don't see much with 5-digit or lower anymore. It is a slow process...but soon it is going to happen.
+Raine Posted January 30, 2007 Posted January 30, 2007 What if I randomly selected a length to show in there..
+tozainamboku Posted January 30, 2007 Posted January 30, 2007 (edited) What if I randomly selected a length to show in there.. Imagine all the posts in forum - Why did the number of XXXXX's change in view a cache box? If I have a 4 digit GC code I want to enter, and it's showing 5 X's, do I have to refresh it until I only get 4 X's? Edited January 30, 2007 by tozainamboku
+Trucker Lee Posted January 30, 2007 Posted January 30, 2007 why not just leave it alone? i tried a 7 digit number, and it worked fine as is. If it ain't broke, don't fix it!!
+Lil Devil Posted January 30, 2007 Posted January 30, 2007 What if I randomly selected a length to show in there.. If I have a 4 digit GC code I want to enter, and it's showing 5 X's, do I have to refresh it until I only get 4 X's?
+GrizzlyJohn Posted January 31, 2007 Posted January 31, 2007 Well please do something about it. Everytime I search I keep getting that same archived cache in New Jersey.
+Super_Nate Posted January 31, 2007 Author Posted January 31, 2007 The idea is to show the maximum number of "Xs" possible to locate the cache listing that is being searched for. If it said "View a Cache Listing" by Waypoint Name : GCX Wouldn't that be confusing for someone wanting to enter in a 6 digit GC number? When that box first appeared on the front page, why did you decide to make GCXXXX as the example when their were caches that had GCXXX codes?
+Super_Nate Posted January 31, 2007 Author Posted January 31, 2007 What if I randomly selected a length to show in there.. Imagine all the posts in forum - Why did the number of XXXXX's change in view a cache box? I think the increased number of forum posts would be encouraging for the people who work hard for the website.....because then they will know that the nit-picky things that they do doesn't go unnoticed.
+fizzymagic Posted January 31, 2007 Posted January 31, 2007 Why not get rid of the Xs altogether? I like to paste in the GC number of the next cache, so they just get in the way. Usability.
+Lil Devil Posted January 31, 2007 Posted January 31, 2007 Why not get rid of the Xs altogether? I like to paste in the GC number of the next cache, so they just get in the way. Usability. Best idea I've read here in a long time. I'm glad someone is thinking.
+TheAprilFools Posted January 31, 2007 Posted January 31, 2007 I would vote for removing the GCXXXX completly, I usually just delete the entire contents before I paste in the code. But if we are going to keep it, I think it should have four X's while the majority of caches have ID's that are that length.
Recommended Posts