Jump to content

Could Cache Listing indicate if Found by viewer?


padlinfool
Followers 3

Recommended Posts

I thought it would be nice if the Cache Listing page could indicate if it was already found by the logged on user.

 

A big Red Check or Smiley Icon prominently displayed somewhere on the page would be great.

 

Right now we have to scroll down through the logs to find our found log or open Geocaching.com Google Maps to find a smiley. I'm sure there are other ways also.

Link to comment

The site over time has added some of these enhancements into the site. A prime example is shown on the page I linked in fact. Prime Suspect built a script to show the totals based on the log types and this was displayed right over the logs. GC.com eventually added that feature, rendering Prime's script redundant. Maybe this could be added at some point.

Link to comment

I thought it would be nice if the Cache Listing page could indicate if it was already found by the logged on user.

 

A big Red Check or Smiley Icon prominently displayed somewhere on the page would be great.

 

Right now we have to scroll down through the logs to find our found log or open Geocaching.com Google Maps to find a smiley. I'm sure there are other ways also.

 

:rolleyes: The feature you request used to be available on GC.com at the top right of the listing page. I have noticed over the last year or so this function has disappeared. Bummer, I found it very handy. :)

Link to comment

Not everyone uses one kind of web browser.

I think this would be a great feature for all cachers.

 

I've asked for it before, and an answer was, well didn't you see a checkmark next to the cache name on the previous page? But the way I got to the cache page was not through a search so NO there was no page where a checkmark could be shown, except for the completely logical request of this OP on the cache page itself.

 

I also think another, exactly similar request, would be for travel bug pages to show that you have 'grabbed', 'retrieved' or 'discovered' that bug, and not force you to have to page through 20 or more pages of logs on that bug. And of course, why doesn't a list of bugs, such as all the Alien geocoins owned by cacherxyz, not have a checkmark for those that you have logged? Same code that's used on a cache search page, right?

 

travel bugs and geocoin web pages get the short end of the stick when it comes to feature requests (usually) on groundspeak. Perhaps part of the popularity behind PathTags, :unsure:

Edited by trainlove
Link to comment

Many times we get to cache pages from notification emails. We see a cache find or DNF and wonder if we have it already. As our find list grows longer, our memory seems to get shorter. This "Found" feature would be great. If this info was an added comment on the notification email that would also be handy!

 

also..

 

The greasemonkey script works GREAT! Thanks Lil Devil!

Link to comment
Not everyone uses one kind of web browser.

I think this would be a great feature for all cachers.

The site over time has added some of these enhancements into the site. A prime example is shown on the page I linked in fact.

 

I've asked for it before, and an answer was, well didn't you see a checkmark next to the cache name on the previous page? But the way I got to the cache page was not through a search so NO there was no page where a checkmark could be shown, except for the completely logical request of this OP on the cache page itself.
Click the link near the maps for all nearby caches. Bingo, for now at least.

 

I also think another, exactly similar request, would be for travel bug pages to show that you have 'grabbed', 'retrieved' or 'discovered' that bug, and not force you to have to page through 20 or more pages of logs on that bug. And of course, why doesn't a list of bugs, such as all the Alien geocoins owned by cacherxyz, not have a checkmark for those that you have logged? Same code that's used on a cache search page, right?

 

travel bugs and geocoin web pages get the short end of the stick when it comes to feature requests (usually) on groundspeak. Perhaps part of the popularity behind PathTags, :)

Open a separate topic, since this request is off topic. You must have some financial investment in pathtags since you mention them every chance you get, even posting sometimes off topic to mention them (like you did here). In this particular topic you capitalized them but conspicuously chose not to capitalize Groundspeak, a company name, and even deliberately using the color function to make sure that it isn't capitalized since the forum software automatically makes the company name capitalized (note that the quoting of your post makes the "g" black). The second "t" is not capitalized in pathtags, by the way. Of course, answering my question is also off topic. :unsure: A curiosity.

Link to comment

There are several pages within the GeoCaching site that would benefit from the Found Checkmark. I've suggested the "DNF" page (the "My Geocaching Logs (Filtered by Log Type)" off of your My Account page) so you could easily tell if you've "cleared" a DNF. Also, your "Watchlist" and some Bookmark lists. In fact, unless a search or list is, by definition, a "Found List", then all pages should show the "Found Checkmark".

 

A separate idea (and probably worthy of it's own topic) would be a filter option on search pages of other cacher's lists (found and owned) that would show those caches NOT found and those FOUND by the logged-on user.

Edited by Cache O'Plenty
Link to comment

I asked for this a couple of years back, and there appears to be a decent amount of support for this simple software change from a number of people... except Groundspeak. Maybe if we make some noise this time, it will get considered.

 

Or put on the back-burner, like the return of the archived caches to the Google Maps...

Link to comment

I also think another, exactly similar request, would be for travel bug pages to show that you have 'grabbed', 'retrieved' or 'discovered' that bug, and not force you to have to page through 20 or more pages of logs on that bug. And of course, why doesn't a list of bugs, such as all the Alien geocoins owned by cacherxyz, not have a checkmark for those that you have logged? Same code that's used on a cache search page, right?

Open a separate topic, since this request is off topic. You must have some financial investment in pathtags since you mention them every chance you get, even posting sometimes off topic to mention them (like you did here). In this particular topic you capitalized them but conspicuously chose not to capitalize Groundspeak, a company name, and even deliberately using the color function to make sure that it isn't capitalized since the forum software automatically makes the company name capitalized (note that the quoting of your post makes the "g" black). The second "t" is not capitalized in pathtags, by the way. Of course, answering my question is also off topic. :) A curiosity.

 

Off topic?

Same source code to implement this second and completely not different request so I think I now see why travel bug and geocoin pages do get the short end of the stick.

Why do we have to exactly spell out that if a change of type x is done for caches, then the same change should be done for travel bugs? Can't the programmers see the logical outcome of their changes? Are they really so cache centric that they don't know that travel bugs also exist on the site?

Link to comment

Why do we have to exactly spell out that if a change of type x is done for caches, then the same change should be done for travel bugs? Can't the programmers see the logical outcome of their changes?

In a previous lifetime I was a Software Test Engineer. Unfortunately, many programmers get so focused on the problem as it was described to them, that they do not look beyond it to see where else it should have been applied. Can get very frustrating.

Link to comment

Why do we have to exactly spell out that if a change of type x is done for caches, then the same change should be done for travel bugs? Can't the programmers see the logical outcome of their changes?

In a previous lifetime I was a Software Test Engineer. Unfortunately, many programmers get so focused on the problem as it was described to them, that they do not look beyond it to see where else it should have been applied. Can get very frustrating.

And this is why major applications end up patchworked over time. Has always been a problem unless there is some formal way to send all changes through a Systems Configuration board of some sort.

Link to comment
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Followers 3
×
×
  • Create New...