Suggestion

[+larkspeed]

The current size chart has 4 sizes for caches micro, small, regular and large. plus it has an unknown size

 

I use this chart to give me a basic idea of what I am looking for, for instance if it is marked as small i'm not going to be looking for places to hide a 35mm film canister

 

There seem to be more people using nano caches now which is considerably smaller than a micro.

 

It would be good if the size chart could be adjusted to account for this so we have nano, micro, small, regular and large. plus unknown.

 

I'm not sure how hard the logistics of implementing a change like this would be but it's just an idea and now it's out there

Edited August 28, 2014 by larkspeed

[+Achtinuknuk]

Of course a great idea!

I'm sure the people from Groundspeak already tought about that but i also would like to see this change

[+Harry Dolphin]

A nano is a micro, by definition.

[+wmpastor]

A nano is a micro, by definition.

True, but he wants finer gradations.

[+Walts Hunting]

Changes to the gpx schema are problematic which is why despite a platter a of requests it has only occurred once and that didn't go all that well.. GS has opened a two week topic under the API topicI believe for all requests which would indicate that are finally considering it.

 

Keep in mind that if it is changed most devices will not be able to read it without updated software which would probably take ed so excited time.

[+EngPhil]

Changes to the gpx schema are problematic which is why despite a platter a of requests it has only occurred once and that didn't go all that well..

Technically, no schema change is required, as the sizes are not actually enumerated in the schema.

 

Having said that, the same goes for the cache type, and look at what broke when they changed Unknown to Mystery there.

 

Having this enumerated in the schema would actually help. You could then bump the GPX version and safely retro-code Nano into Micro for the older GPX version. I guess you could bump the version even without changing the spec, and just use Nano in the newer GPX version.....

 

GS has opened a two week topic under the API topicI believe for all requests which would indicate that are finally considering it.

Ooh. Sounds promising. I'm still not holding my breath, given Groundspeak's track record, but I'd love for my cynicism to be proven wrong for once.

 

Keep in mind that if it is changed most devices will not be able to read it without updated software which would probably take ed so excited time.

Why is Ed so excited about these changes?

 

.... but yes. Plenty of failure modes are possible here; there's now the GPX and the API compatibility to worry about.