PQ selection area box

[+Dragery]

Could there be an implementation of a feature, that instead of a radius from a certain location, I could have a re-sizable square, adjustable, like a window, to select an area for a PQ? I live in a very cache satured area, and it's extremely difficult to create pocket queries that don't overlap caches, or leave out certain areas.

 

Doing this would allow you to slightly modify your area of intent. Say you're at JUST over 1000 caches, you could move the right side slightly in. THEN create another PQ next to that area.

 

 

The goal here is to maximize the the area covered without overlapping/skipping caches.

Edited June 12, 2010 by trainmanup

[+Markwell]

See my answer in your other thread

[+FancoverFive]

Have you tried using date ranges? Have one Pocket Query that searches for all caches within x miles of point y from 2000 - 2004, 2004 - 2006, 2006 - 2007, etc, all from the same point. This removes the overlap so allows more caches to be included if you get the ranges right.

[+Dragery]

Have you tried using date ranges? Have one Pocket Query that searches for all caches within x miles of point y from 2000 - 2004, 2004 - 2006, 2006 - 2007, etc, all from the same point. This removes the overlap so allows more caches to be included if you get the ranges right.

 

Not a bad idea sir, I'll give that a shot.

[+Gitchee-Gummee]

Along with a silver platter, maybe?

 

Perhaps a little snarky, but there are solutions of sorts to your problem.

 

Regarding overlap, if you run a PQ filtering out those caches you have already found, they don't show -- only the ones you haven't found. I just don't see where overlap is a big problem. Besides, new caches are put out all the time while others are archived all the time.

To cover such an area certainly would render "group" PQ's mostly useless within a week or so. Can you cover all of them in a week or so? If not, a current PQ would probably benefit you more than one that was two weeks old.

 

Sorry, I just don't see the feature implementation of squared areas any more beneficial than what currently exists.

[+Dragery]

Along with a silver platter, maybe?

 

Perhaps a little snarky, but there are solutions of sorts to your problem.

 

Regarding overlap, if you run a PQ filtering out those caches you have already found, they don't show -- only the ones you haven't found. I just don't see where overlap is a big problem. Besides, new caches are put out all the time while others are archived all the time.

To cover such an area certainly would render "group" PQ's mostly useless within a week or so. Can you cover all of them in a week or so? If not, a current PQ would probably benefit you more than one that was two weeks old.

 

Sorry, I just don't see the feature implementation of squared areas any more beneficial than what currently exists.

The overlapping comes into play with the radius overlapping, say I run a circular PQ next to a circular PQ, they will overlap caches (that I havn't found) and although they wont overlap on my GPS, it's still taking up spots on my PQ limit. (and in my area, there is 1000 caches within a 10 mile radius anywhere within 50 miles I point)

[+Gitchee-Gummee]

OK, that is a fair point. Lessee though, how long will it take you to do 1000 caches (for the matter, the 10,000)?

 

Trust me, you aren't gonna want to run with PQ's that are that old. That alone doesn't negate the overlap, but quite a bit of the information that you stored in those 1000+ caches for a month or so is useless at that point.

 

I know, it would be great to be methodical in your "coverage" of the area -- but you are going to find yourself running back to the same areas anyway.

 

I just don't see the time, trouble or expense worth it in making such alterations in the programming.

But hey, I've been wrong before. Always wrong if you ask my "boss".

[+Markwell]

Seems like your two threads really should be combined....