This object is in archive!
More flexible distance marker - and marking of direction
Completed
Hi Menion,
it would be really helpful to allow for more or less distance markers with a long tap on its quick settings.
Combined with (any) distance markers (i.e. no extra setting) I would appreciate the direction arrows, like they appear when selecting a track on screen.
TXs and cheers
Michael
I like this idea 
Hi Michael,
may you please describe a little better your idea? It is not perfectly clear to me, thanks!
Menion
Hi Michael,
may you please describe a little better your idea? It is not perfectly clear to me, thanks!
Menion
Currently the distance markers can be meaningless if you zoon in - you see one or two, or none.
So, give more control to your users, please:
- if it is easily possible, allow to user to define the number of marker (s)he wants to see - on the current screen
- if above is too complicated, allow the user to multiply the current number in a setting (x2, x4, x8, x16 is enough for sure). As usual, this setting should be accessible via the Quich Settings (long press on the respective field)
Why people asked for markers in the first place? To get a better understanding about what they see. In the same category is my second idea: currently the little arcs on the track (indicating the direction of movement on the track) only show up when you activate it. When you swap the track info pane out, those arcs disappear.
To make things easy, I would like to see those arcs whenever the markers are activated. Both items (markers and arcs) belong to the same objective: better understanding of the track. So I would avoid an extra setting for those arcs.
Makes sense, Menion?
TXs and kind regards
Michael
Currently the distance markers can be meaningless if you zoon in - you see one or two, or none.
So, give more control to your users, please:
- if it is easily possible, allow to user to define the number of marker (s)he wants to see - on the current screen
- if above is too complicated, allow the user to multiply the current number in a setting (x2, x4, x8, x16 is enough for sure). As usual, this setting should be accessible via the Quich Settings (long press on the respective field)
Why people asked for markers in the first place? To get a better understanding about what they see. In the same category is my second idea: currently the little arcs on the track (indicating the direction of movement on the track) only show up when you activate it. When you swap the track info pane out, those arcs disappear.
To make things easy, I would like to see those arcs whenever the markers are activated. Both items (markers and arcs) belong to the same objective: better understanding of the track. So I would avoid an extra setting for those arcs.
Makes sense, Menion?
TXs and kind regards
Michael
Hi Michael, thanks for the explanation. Makes sense.
- currently, markers are visible to a minimal range 1 km, so if you zoom too much, the app still displays markers only every 1km, so it may happen there are none on the screen. Hmm is this really a problem? I do not expect users try to get an overview of the track in zoom 20 or higher.
- multiply is doable anyway I still think that till zoom 16-17, it is not needed because there should always be at least one (usually two) markers visible
- directions: this may be really easily solvable but custom style for the track with direction arrows
---
So I'm not convinced that more frequent markers are usable. Any other opinions from other users?
Hi Michael, thanks for the explanation. Makes sense.
- currently, markers are visible to a minimal range 1 km, so if you zoom too much, the app still displays markers only every 1km, so it may happen there are none on the screen. Hmm is this really a problem? I do not expect users try to get an overview of the track in zoom 20 or higher.
- multiply is doable anyway I still think that till zoom 16-17, it is not needed because there should always be at least one (usually two) markers visible
- directions: this may be really easily solvable but custom style for the track with direction arrows
---
So I'm not convinced that more frequent markers are usable. Any other opinions from other users?
TXs, Menion.
The custom style approach is even more consistent, and easier, as you say.
Re. markers I just tested systematically:
- you start with a distance of 10km
- on my S10 at ZL 13, it's down to 1km
- from ZL 15 on there is one or no marker left
My idea may be a bit over-engineered, so why not simply extend the range (without any setting or UI change) start with 50km and stop with 200m? Trivial to implement, I suppose. As long as enough markers are there currently, the density as such is just fine.
But one more thing popped up when looking at a track where front and back end of a track share the same way: the markers could embed a little arrow, too - upwards up to half total distance, downwards for the second half :-))) Not really joking, but indulging in some eclecticism.
TXs, Menion.
The custom style approach is even more consistent, and easier, as you say.
Re. markers I just tested systematically:
- you start with a distance of 10km
- on my S10 at ZL 13, it's down to 1km
- from ZL 15 on there is one or no marker left
My idea may be a bit over-engineered, so why not simply extend the range (without any setting or UI change) start with 50km and stop with 200m? Trivial to implement, I suppose. As long as enough markers are there currently, the density as such is just fine.
But one more thing popped up when looking at a track where front and back end of a track share the same way: the markers could embed a little arrow, too - upwards up to half total distance, downwards for the second half :-))) Not really joking, but indulging in some eclecticism.
Hi Michael,
- I've just added support for lower zoom levels, since zl 9 where it still makes sense
- higher zoom levels with more labels (sub-kilometer) are problematic. Labels are pre-created and for longer tracks, it really makes performance problems.
At least something, thanks for understanding.
Menion
Hi Michael,
- I've just added support for lower zoom levels, since zl 9 where it still makes sense
- higher zoom levels with more labels (sub-kilometer) are problematic. Labels are pre-created and for longer tracks, it really makes performance problems.
At least something, thanks for understanding.
Menion
Replies have been locked on this page!