BIG CHANGE: New Sizes

[+Pinehurst]

The Geocaching sizes should be updated because they are outdated. No one hides 5 gallon buckets (large) anymore, mostly just micro. Maybe update them to something like this:

 

[knowschad]

PINEHURST!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

Nice chart!

 

Howya doing? LTNS!!

[+niraD]

A new nano size is planned. Implementation has been delayed. See also:

http://forums.Groundspeak.com/GC/index.php?showtopic=285144

[AZcachemeister]

Implementation has been delayed.

 

Along with every other user-requested improvement/feature.

[+Colonial Cats]

How about humongous and teeny-weeny.

[+Gitchee-Gummee]

Ginormous!

[jholly]

Is this the very big announcement that Trump had today?

[+Crow-T-Robot]

It's a MAGOR change!

[+Lexmarks567]

Implementation has been delayed.

 

In otherwords never gonna happen.

[+Don_J]

A new nano size is planned. Implementation has been delayed. See also:

http://forums.Groundspeak.com/GC/index.php?showtopic=285144

 

Unfortunately, because of the initial reluctance and then the delay in implementing a nano size, most newer cachers think that the right side of that chart ARE the proper size designations.

[+Teuto-Yachter]

The Geocaching sizes should be updated because they are outdated. No one hides 5 gallon buckets (large) anymore, mostly just micro.

(...)

Oh yes, there are some genuine Large caches around, though I admit they're rare. I very much would like to see the Nano size implemented just like you described it, but I wouldn't support renaming the other sizes.

[jholly]

The Geocaching sizes should be updated because they are outdated. No one hides 5 gallon buckets (large) anymore, mostly just micro.

(...)

Oh yes, there are some genuine Large caches around, though I admit they're rare. I very much would like to see the Nano size implemented just like you described it, but I wouldn't support renaming the other sizes.

I can tell you Groundspeak very much wants to rename the current regular to medium. The submission redesign sneak peek showed the regular as a medium and did show a nano choice. During one of the updates they even snuck the medium size on to caches pages after a site update. Didn't change any of the submission pages, PQ, .gpx files or API returns, just the cache page. After a bit of pointing out the confusion that creates they relented and changed back to regular. IF they ever change the PQ data schema, incorporate the nano size and finish the submission forum work I fully expect to see the regular size changed to medium.

[+Don_J]

The Geocaching sizes should be updated because they are outdated. No one hides 5 gallon buckets (large) anymore, mostly just micro.

(...)

Oh yes, there are some genuine Large caches around, though I admit they're rare. I very much would like to see the Nano size implemented just like you described it, but I wouldn't support renaming the other sizes.

I can tell you Groundspeak very much wants to rename the current regular to medium. The submission redesign sneak peek showed the regular as a medium and did show a nano choice. During one of the updates they even snuck the medium size on to caches pages after a site update. Didn't change any of the submission pages, PQ, .gpx files or API returns, just the cache page. After a bit of pointing out the confusion that creates they relented and changed back to regular. IF they ever change the PQ data schema, incorporate the nano size and finish the submission forum work I fully expect to see the regular size changed to medium.

 

That just makes sense. Medium belongs between small and large.

[jholly]

The Geocaching sizes should be updated because they are outdated. No one hides 5 gallon buckets (large) anymore, mostly just micro.

(...)

Oh yes, there are some genuine Large caches around, though I admit they're rare. I very much would like to see the Nano size implemented just like you described it, but I wouldn't support renaming the other sizes.

I can tell you Groundspeak very much wants to rename the current regular to medium. The submission redesign sneak peek showed the regular as a medium and did show a nano choice. During one of the updates they even snuck the medium size on to caches pages after a site update. Didn't change any of the submission pages, PQ, .gpx files or API returns, just the cache page. After a bit of pointing out the confusion that creates they relented and changed back to regular. IF they ever change the PQ data schema, incorporate the nano size and finish the submission forum work I fully expect to see the regular size changed to medium.

 

That just makes sense. Medium belongs between small and large.

I agree it makes sense, but unless you can, and will, change it across the board it is best to leave sleeping dogs lie. And when you start messing with the PQ schema you have to wonder how many GPS units your going to brick. Yes, the XML parser should be able to handle it, but some can't and that is why we have a version 1.0 and version 1.0.1.