Jump to content

Release Notes (Website: new Search/Map) - January 17, 2019


Recommended Posts

I've just noticed a problem when using the new search map to map the caches in a list. First I go to the list of my lists from the dashboard, then open the hamburger menu on the right and click on Map List.

 

image.png.21146bd6d17b81f70cc1c10e815ed74f.png

 

In the left hand panel of the search map, it says it's showing the caches sorted by distance but it's actually sorting them by number of FPs.

 

image.png.91e075d669567eace5b95ba62b42f20d.png

 

Then if I click on the Sort by field to try to force it to sort by distance, it forgets it's supposed to be just the caches in my list and brings in all the other caches on the map. Not only that, while the ordering of the caches is actually by distance from my home, the distances shown are wrong: for example, the one I've put an arrow next to (McEvoy Bushland) is less than a kilometre from home yet it's showing it as 3.22km from, um, where?

 

image.thumb.png.89c7b977a81b883811f1a470b57ae039.png

 

Link to comment

I believe I've got a bug report which relates to the side bar of the new map. I've tried to digest this forum and I think this is the right place to post this and I've not spotted a duplicate of it recently in my half hour of searching, but I could be wrong.

 

When logging from the map, I noticed in the side bar which lists the last 5 logs that a local cacher had found the cache before me, then I noticed that their profile photo was upside down. Out of intrigue, I tracked down another cache they had found to see the same result. I then checked they had not flipped it themselves, and it seemed not to be the case.

 

Screen shots of behaviour added. Using Chrome 73 on Windows 10.

UpsideDownProfilePicture.png

UpsideDownProfilePicture2.png

ProfilePictureRightWayUp.png

Link to comment
9 minutes ago, Geocaching HQ said:

Here’s a quick note on today’s update:

  • Filters updated on the home screen. We updated the look and feel of the filters that are accessible from the home screen to match the new filters panel that was introduced on the new map.
     

9XPEry9M_WOD4NvzgOAW0lK-y55rh0eK7737x1at

 

Technically I'm missing 2 cachesizes: Virtual and Unknown. Besides that I liked the old version of the toggles more. It's not exactly most logical that the search finds BOTH Basic/Premium if nothing is selected ;-) Same with the other toggles.

The geocache type don't allow selection between the different event types and I THINK that I can't find the HQ cache with that search. I checked found mysteries in Washington state and as I already found the HQ...

APE caches are missing, too.

Link to comment
43 minutes ago, Geocaching HQ said:

Here’s a quick note on today’s update:

  • Filters updated on the home screen. We updated the look and feel of the filters that are accessible from the home screen to match the new filters panel that was introduced on the new map.
     

9XPEry9M_WOD4NvzgOAW0lK-y55rh0eK7737x1at

 

The "Has Personal Cache Note" search option has disappeared.

Link to comment
30 minutes ago, monsterbox said:

 

Technically I'm missing 2 cachesizes: Virtual and Unknown. Besides that I liked the old version of the toggles more. It's not exactly most logical that the search finds BOTH Basic/Premium if nothing is selected ;-) Same with the other toggles.

The geocache type don't allow selection between the different event types and I THINK that I can't find the HQ cache with that search. I checked found mysteries in Washington state and as I already found the HQ...

APE caches are missing, too.

They seem to have put the Virtual and Unknown cache size with Others.

 

But I found strange too that they removed the toggles and not automatically select both options then.

Link to comment
32 minutes ago, monsterbox said:

Besides that I liked the old version of the toggles more. It's not exactly most logical that the search finds BOTH Basic/Premium if nothing is selected ;-) Same with the other toggles.

 

I agree. I mentioned this earlier in reference to the filter style on the new search map. The behavior of the "Cache status" filters is confusing. For example, if someone wants to view caches that fulfill both options (like I want to see both enabled and disabled caches), it would make sense that you need to check both of those options. However, the correct way to get results that fulfill both options it is to uncheck both, which is unintuitive.

 

The old style with three states was much easier to understand and didn't need to be "fixed".

Link to comment
8 minutes ago, Lynx Humble said:

They seem to have put the Virtual and Unknown cache size with Others.

 

Checked that and it looks like you're right! I just gave it a try and I really get Virtuals and Events in my result list. By the way: Events seem to have "other" as size nowadays vs. "not chosen" back then. Just figured out that the 2 other old sizes can't be used for new caches any longer. Guess that's the reason why they are missing in the selction. I can live with that as long as the search delivers results for all the 3 types.

Link to comment
17 minutes ago, Lynx Humble said:

They seem to have put the Virtual and Unknown cache size with Others.

 

This is a big problem. I'm not sure if it's new or if it's been like this for a while and nobody has noticed.

 

In the list of results, the sizes "Not chosen" and "Virtual" have been relabelled as "Other", making them indistinguishable from the actual "Other"s. This needs to be fixed, in addition to adding the relevant size options to the filter dialog. The sizes "Other", "Not chosen", and "Virtual" are all very different, so one needs to be able to see the actual size.

Edited by The A-Team
Link to comment
On 4/2/2019 at 6:25 PM, The A-Team said:

 

I agree. I mentioned this earlier in reference to the filter style on the new search map. The behavior of the "Cache status" filters is confusing. For example, if someone wants to view caches that fulfill both options (like I want to see both enabled and disabled caches), it would make sense that you need to check both of those options. However, the correct way to get results that fulfill both options it is to uncheck both, which is unintuitive.

 

The old style with three states was much easier to understand and didn't need to be "fixed".

 

I suspect that the rationale is that the page is a Filters page, used for filtering results.  By checking anything on the page it applies a filter that reduces the results.  When nothing is checked, no filters are applied.  It works similar to how online shopping sites work.  

Link to comment
1 hour ago, NYPaddleCacher said:

I suspect that the rationale is that the page is a Filters page, used for filtering results.  By checking anything on the page it applies a filter that reduces the results.  When nothing is checked, no filters are applied.  It works similar to how online shopping sites work.  

 

Yes, so it's a matter of making sure the interface isn't confusing.  eg if you have a "Yes" option and a "No" option, having two distinct toggles is confusing. Yes it technically works as intended, but for the front-facing end, it could be more user -friendly to show "Both/Yes/No/None" as a single-select option.  Toggling both Yes and No on or off at the same time seems contradictory.  It's really just a matter of looking at the interface and realizing the front end doesn't have to be a literal representation of every option the backend requires. Make the UI human-friendly.  And that may well depend on the audience. In some circles this whole discussion could be moot because those users naturally understand how the separate options work.  So devs need to listen to feedback, and weigh the negative more than the positive.

 

People who understand the difficult will probabaly understand the easy. People who understand the easy won't necessarily understand the difficult.  You accomodate more people assuming they need the easy (and that's not an argument to always develop for the lowest common denominator :P just to find a reasonable balance to accomodae the most people)

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment

So I just mapped the contents of a list and am presented with a new map. No way to opt out. I really need one specific OSM maps for this as that one has community boundaries on it, which those three that I can chose don't have. This is for a challenge cache trip I want to do tomorrow. Right, what now?

 

Another thing I noticed: If I don't give permission to determine my location, this still happens. Looks like the not permission option doesn't work.

 

edit: ok, figured out it's a beta test. I just opted out and got my OSM map back. Phew!

Edited by terratin
Link to comment
On 4/5/2019 at 6:23 PM, terratin said:

So I just mapped the contents of a list and am presented with a new map. No way to opt out. I really need one specific OSM maps for this as that one has community boundaries on it, which those three that I can chose don't have. This is for a challenge cache trip I want to do tomorrow. Right, what now?

 

 

Your other option would have been putting the results into a bookmarklist and do a pocket query onto that list and show it in the normal map :)

Link to comment
20 hours ago, monsterbox said:

 

Your other option would have been putting the results into a bookmarklist and do a pocket query onto that list and show it in the normal map :)

 True, but I was still adding and deleting caches from the list at that time. Running a new pq with every change is a bit annoying. But opting out of beta testing did the trick in the end.

Link to comment
On 4/5/2019 at 4:38 AM, NYPaddleCacher said:

I suspect that the rationale is that the page is a Filters page, used for filtering results.  By checking anything on the page it applies a filter that reduces the results.  When nothing is checked, no filters are applied.  It works similar to how online shopping sites work.  

 

I think the reason is that the Status section is applying the "All" radio button of the previous Advanced Search, but without showing the "All" option.  Imagine there is a third option for each status that says "all", which is what was displayed in the previous Advanced Search filters pane.  When neither of the visible options is selected, it's because the "all" option is selected.  I mentioned this same thing on 2/1 on page 4 of this thread.

 

If the rationale is that "when nothing is checked, no filters are applied" then that rationale should be applied to the entire pane.  Cache type and cache size do not work that way.  For type/size the user has to select which ones to display.  If none are checked, then they don't all apply.

Link to comment
On 3/3/2019 at 5:01 PM, Team DEMP said:

But whatever W3 is doing as well as Google and PGC works best for me and should be looked at by the GC folks. 

Maybe I missed it, but did you mention what type of hardware you're using to get such good results?

 

 

On 3/23/2019 at 12:42 PM, markacher said:

I got selected to use the new maps .. GEO-ART doesn't seem to work.  I did the WV Star last weekend.  We solved all the mysteries and updated the coordinated just like always.  We found the caches, but when I logged them, they stay at the solved coordinates rather that reverting to the published coordinates to show me my start filled with smilies.  My wife who is still using the old map has different results. This is what we discovered ..  the old map shows the Star but the new map, does not.  I'm kinda stuck on the new maps.  This seems like a bug to me. Refer to the attached file.

I think you're confusing the Browse Map with the Search Map.  The Browse Map is not part of this update.  It's the Search Map that is being changed, and if you don't like the new Search Map then you can OptOut by going to this page and clicking on the link to Opt Out on that page.

 

The Browse Map (Play -> View Map) will show smileys at their posted (not solved) coords.  So GeoArt will display as the art shape.

The Search Map (Play -> Search) will show smileys at their solved coords, so GeoArt does not "work" - but this can be good when wanting to remind yourself where the cache you found was, or when wanting to check for proximity issues.

 

More commentary from me about it  HERE .

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