Release Notes 6/10/08

[Keystone]

When I click on the link to "...all nearby caches that I haven't found" the link takes me to the SEEK GEOCACHE main page where it asks for the coordinates etc and not to the listing.

 

What a PITA! I use this link all the time.

 

Deane

AKA: DeRock & the Psychic Cacher - Grattan MI

See this post where Raine indicates that he's fixing the "nearest unfound caches" link.

 

Sorry about your sore bottom.

[+ePeterso2]

Sooooo ... still no TITLE attributes in IMG tags? I thought Jeremy said that was slated to be fixed ... like ... two releases ago?

[OpinioNate]

Sooooo ... still no TITLE attributes in IMG tags? I thought Jeremy said that was slated to be fixed ... like ... two releases ago?

 

Jeremy had thought he fixed that but apparently not. It's fixed now, though. Sorry for the delay!

[+sylds]

When I print out a copy of the page the street map is not printing. I just get a blank square.

[+paleolith]

Sooooo ... still no TITLE attributes in IMG tags? I thought Jeremy said that was slated to be fixed ... like ... two releases ago?

Jeremy had thought he fixed that but apparently not. It's fixed now, though. Sorry for the delay!

Still no rel attributes on img tags ... and AFAIK still not a single gc.com response on the issue. Restoring it should be easy. If there's really a security issue -- which no one posting about it has indicated -- then please explain. I had a very nice cache description using lightbox, and that part has been disabled for two months. And someone else just started a new thread asking why they can't use lightbox ...

 

Edward

[OpinioNate]

Sooooo ... still no TITLE attributes in IMG tags? I thought Jeremy said that was slated to be fixed ... like ... two releases ago?

Jeremy had thought he fixed that but apparently not. It's fixed now, though. Sorry for the delay!

Still no rel attributes on img tags ... and AFAIK still not a single gc.com response on the issue. Restoring it should be easy. If there's really a security issue -- which no one posting about it has indicated -- then please explain. I had a very nice cache description using lightbox, and that part has been disabled for two months. And someone else just started a new thread asking why they can't use lightbox ...

 

Edward

You asked about TITLE attributes in IMG tags and I responded that we fixed it. As for lightbox, Groundspeak does not want to give users that kind of control over the cache page.

[+paleolith]

You asked about TITLE attributes in IMG tags and I responded that we fixed it.

I was referring to this post in "Release Notes 4/16/08" from May 10 and the thread "lightbox calls filtered out?" started May 9.

As for lightbox, Groundspeak does not want to give users that kind of control over the cache page.

I really have a difficult time understanding this argument. It's not like I'm loading my own JavaScript. lightbox simply shows an image in the foreground of the page rather than on a separate page or in a very large block on the page. I don't know of any way to use it other than the way Groundspeak is already using it in the cache logs. Though a few people dislike it, most seem to agree that it's an effective way to present images without leaving the current page, particularly in its ability to present several images in a cycle without creating back-out problems.

 

I see far more control of cache pages allowed through other methods, such as dramatically styled text and even scrolling banners.

 

As pointed out in the discussions linked above, allowing lightbox does not involve allowing the user to execute user-specified JavaScript. Not even the invocation of lightbox needs JS. It is invoked purely by the title and rel attributes on an <A> tag. (I said IMG tag earlier. That was incorrect. I made that error because I was using it with IMG tags inside the A tag with the title and rel attributes.) There's a HUGE difference between allowing user-written JS (and I totally agree with disallowing that) and allowing setting up lightbox.

 

It just doesn't make sense. 72-point multicolored type is allowed. Huge images, severely disrupting the page, are allowed as long as they are embedded. Yet lightbox, the gentlest way of presenting images, totally secure AFAIK, and with automatic fallback when JS is disabled, is not allowed. It just doesn't make sense to me.

 

Edward

[+tozainamboku]

I really have a difficult time understanding this argument. It's not like I'm loading my own JavaScript. lightbox simply shows an image in the foreground of the page rather than on a separate page or in a very large block on the page. I don't know of any way to use it other than the way Groundspeak is already using it in the cache logs. Though a few people dislike it, most seem to agree that it's an effective way to present images without leaving the current page, particularly in its ability to present several images in a cycle without creating back-out problems.

The problem with allowing users to use it that it then forces GC.com to continue to support it. Suppose in v.2 they decide to display pictures associated with a cache or log another way. Geocaching.com would want to remove this script from the cache page and that could break a lot of cache pages. Relying on any script or styles that are used by geocaching.com is not a good idea. They may be changed at any time. Keep your HTML simple and independent from the rest of the GC.com page and you won't have these problems.

[+WRASTRO]

I really have a difficult time understanding this argument. It's not like I'm loading my own JavaScript. lightbox simply shows an image in the foreground of the page rather than on a separate page or in a very large block on the page. I don't know of any way to use it other than the way Groundspeak is already using it in the cache logs. Though a few people dislike it, most seem to agree that it's an effective way to present images without leaving the current page, particularly in its ability to present several images in a cycle without creating back-out problems.

The problem with allowing users to use it that it then forces GC.com to continue to support it. Suppose in v.2 they decide to display pictures associated with a cache or log another way. Geocaching.com would want to remove this script from the cache page and that could break a lot of cache pages. Relying on any script or styles that are used by geocaching.com is not a good idea. They may be changed at any time. Keep your HTML simple and independent from the rest of the GC.com page and you won't have these problems.

Now there you go making sense again. This is a disturbing trend and we need to take appropriate measures to curtail this behavior.

[+GPX Navigators]

When I print out a copy of the page the street map is not printing. I just get a blank square.

 

Having the same problem using IE and in FF it prints only sometimes. Generally the maps are falling towards the bottom of the page and getting cut off despite adjusting margins. You see either a blank space where the map should be using IE and in FF sometimes you see part of the map, sometimes none of it.

 

Also, is there a way to revert back to the original map screen after clicking the i button?

[+paleolith]

The problem with allowing users to use it that it then forces GC.com to continue to support it. Suppose in v.2 they decide to display pictures associated with a cache or log another way. Geocaching.com would want to remove this script from the cache page and that could break a lot of cache pages.

One of the nice things about the lightbox setup is that it falls back gracefully. gc.com removing lightbox woud have exactly the same effect as users browsing with JS turned off today -- clicking the photo links to a new page rather than invoking lightbox. In fact, that's what my description pages do now since the rel attributes have been stripped.

 

Using lightbox requires at least basic HTML knowledge. If you can program it to begin with, then you can reprogram it if it changes -- noting again that until you do, your descriptions still work, just degraded.

 

Right now we have (at least) three ways images are presented: full lightbox (in logs), partial lightbox (in the description gallery, where images are presented with lightbox but not linked), and other places where lightbox is not allowed. If gc.com would come up with a standard presentation to be used in all places, with a UI to set it up so that they could change the underlying implementation if necessary, that would be great. But it's more than I'm asking for.

 

While this is an issue, I don't agree that it's enough of a problem to justify prohibiting the use.

 

Edward

[+edscott]

When I print out a copy of the page the street map is not printing. I just get a blank square.

 

Having the same problem using IE and in FF it prints only sometimes. Generally the maps are falling towards the bottom of the page and getting cut off despite adjusting margins. You see either a blank space where the map should be using IE and in FF sometimes you see part of the map, sometimes none of it.

 

Also, is there a way to revert back to the original map screen after clicking the i button?

 

Yes I wish someone that understands what is happening would respond. It would be nice to know if it is being worked on or ignored.

[+FireRef]

I would like to know whatever happened to the "Archived caches will be added back into the google map" promise...

 

It seems to have been lost in the shuffle, along with allowing some HTML back in the cache pages. Some of the stuff on mine still looks pretty bad, because we were told to just hold on and wait while things were fixed. Seems pretty easy to flip a switch to shut features off, but not as easy to flip it to get them back.

[+Doxie Man]

Please let us know in this thread about any problems related to this update.

 

Edit: Please be sure to close any instances of Geocaching.com running on your browser and clear your browser cache if you have trouble viewing the maps.

 

I see that you are already aware of the issue of maps not showing up on the cache pages. I'm adding this message just so others that view this thread can see that you are working on it.

 

Yikes! I just noticed that the thread I mentioned above is very old. I'm missing maps on all cache pages that I've tried today. I've tried on two different XP computers, one with IE6 and one with IE7.

[+Doxie Man]

I am having the same problem. the maps show on the cache pages but when you select "FILE/PRINT PREVIEW" you will notice that you only get a blank box with the "+" & "-" and the "i" at the top. How do we get the maps to print so we can know where the cache is located. When you print then the location maps show as blank boxes.

Edited June 24, 2008 by Doxie Man

[Rhialto]

Suppose in v.2

We are not running v.2? With all the recent changes in the last months I thought that was it.

[+GPX Navigators]

When I print out a copy of the page the street map is not printing. I just get a blank square.

 

Having the same problem using IE and in FF it prints only sometimes. Generally the maps are falling towards the bottom of the page and getting cut off despite adjusting margins. You see either a blank space where the map should be using IE and in FF sometimes you see part of the map, sometimes none of it.

 

Also, is there a way to revert back to the original map screen after clicking the i button?

 

Any news on this? Now I can't even see it on Firefox. We need the maps for areas we travel to that we are unfamiliar with, especially areas with only gravel road access. Thanks for any help.

[+gymgirl56]

I know this has been mentioned a couple of times already but thought I'd add my 2 cents. I"m also having problems getting the map in the center of the page (right above the logs) to print. It shows up on the computer screen but I just get an outlined white box when it prints. The small map at the top of the log prints but not the other map. Only bringng this up because I haven't seen any reference to the problem being worked on. Thanks.

[+sylds]

When I print out a copy of the page the street map is not printing. I just get a blank square.

 

Does anyone know if this problem is being looked at. Really has made it hard for us when caching in new areas. Had to give up on some caches

[+WVRadar]

When I print out a copy of the page the street map is not printing. I just get a blank square.

 

Does anyone know if this problem is being looked at. Really has made it hard for us when caching in new areas. Had to give up on some caches

 

I printed 4 cache pages today (first time in a couple of weeks). Am also experiencing the problem with the maps not printing.

[+SirSneakalot]

Anyone having very slow GC.com performance today? It just started this moring. Google maps is slow and even bring up cache pages is taking minutes. The "My Geocache page" comes up quickly though.

Edited July 13, 2008 by SirSneakalot

[+paleolith]

Anyone having very slow GC.com performance today?

This is unrelated to the thread topic. Please start a new thread/topic if you need help with this.

 

Edward

[+Hynr]

• Directional designators on the report a new cache page are now imported from your home coordinates
  

Not sure what this refers to (I see no directional designators on that page for a cache description I am currently working on), but on that page I cannot get the coordinate group to show a map image of where the proposed cache is located (yes, I do have valid coordinates filled in). Will this be addressed? That would be a nice feature and probably prevent a lot of mis-typed locations from being published.

[+Prime Suspect]

• Directional designators on the report a new cache page are now imported from your home coordinates
  

Not sure what this refers to (I see no directional designators on that page for a cache description I am currently working on), but on that page I cannot get the coordinate group to show a map image of where the proposed cache is located (yes, I do have valid coordinates filled in). Will this be addressed? That would be a nice feature and probably prevent a lot of mis-typed locations from being published.

This means the N/S and E/W setting for the cache's coordinates will be taken from your home coordinates, instead of defaulting to N and W.

[+SUp3rFM & Cruella]

The site was updated today (and over the last week) with the following fixes:

• Special characters in the "placed by" cache field now properly displayed in search results
  

 

Hmm.

 

 

As you can see, in the search results, the ampersand is only displayed correctly in one occasion. While in others, it remains as &amp.

 

I may have edited the cache page about a week ago, but have not messed with the others. The question is. The only solution to get it fixed correctly is only by editing and saving again the cache page?

 

Hope that's not the way to fix it.

 

Another puzzling situation.

 

We have a cache named GCTC0Y - O Tejo é mais belo [Lisboa]

 

We got a notification like this one:

 

 

Again, special characters are not displayed correctly. This time is the "é". While in some instances is correctly displayed in others it's not.

 

This time, don't blame the ampersand. :-)

Edited July 23, 2008 by SUp3rFM & Cruella

[+GPX Navigators]

When I print out a copy of the page the street map is not printing. I just get a blank square.

 

Having the same problem using IE and in FF it prints only sometimes. Generally the maps are falling towards the bottom of the page and getting cut off despite adjusting margins. You see either a blank space where the map should be using IE and in FF sometimes you see part of the map, sometimes none of it.

 

Also, is there a way to revert back to the original map screen after clicking the i button?

 

Any news on this? Now I can't even see it on Firefox. We need the maps for areas we travel to that we are unfamiliar with, especially areas with only gravel road access. Thanks for any help.

 

Was hoping the new release would bring a change on the maps but nope, still can't print the maps. Is this how it is going to remain? Does anyone care?

[+benh57]

Was hoping the new release would bring a change on the maps but nope, still can't print the maps. Is this how it is going to remain? Does anyone care?

 

Rather than printing the page using the print button (broken map) click the "Print page simple" link on the cache page. The maps work for me when printed from there. Of course, no logs.

 

There is also a 'driving directions' print option now.

 

-Ben (paperless)

[+GPX Navigators]

Is there any reason the map problem is not being addressed? I've tried to keep a careful watch on both release notes topics and am not seeing any response at all from Groundspeak to this problem.

 

Is this how the maps are going to remain?

 

We appreciate how busy everyone is but the maps are a major component of caching. We rely on them. A lot.

 

Please give some kind of official response. We would appreciate it. Or point me to where the response has already been provided. Thanks.

 

 

When I print out a copy of the page the street map is not printing. I just get a blank square.

 

Having the same problem using IE and in FF it prints only sometimes. Generally the maps are falling towards the bottom of the page and getting cut off despite adjusting margins. You see either a blank space where the map should be using IE and in FF sometimes you see part of the map, sometimes none of it.

 

Also, is there a way to revert back to the original map screen after clicking the i button?

 

Any news on this? Now I can't even see it on Firefox. We need the maps for areas we travel to that we are unfamiliar with, especially areas with only gravel road access. Thanks for any help.

 

Was hoping the new release would bring a change on the maps but nope, still can't print the maps. Is this how it is going to remain? Does anyone care?