Hi Hussey,

Thanks once again,

After much discussion, the solution we're looking at is
"phonegap" (http://phonegap.com). The reason being we need to be able
to upload pictures from a mobile device and it seems this is a big
problem for iPad / iPhone with other solutions. But phonegap gets
around it for some reason (I am now out of my depth!).




Do you have any thoughts / experience of phonegap? Any downsides
(other than, as I understand it, we need different versions for iOS,
android which increases complexity and development timelines etc.)?




Thanks,




Rob

On Feb 16, 5:32 pm, hussey <[email protected]> wrote:
> I'm working on a mobile version of my site right now, and am very
> happy with my decision to use jquery mobile.
>
> For simpler sites you may find that jquery mobile, if designed
> appropriately from the start, will suffice even for desktop users. If
> you notice their demo (which is the same as their docs) expands
> beautifully on desktop browsers. I assume this just uses different CSS
> style sheets and good planning with their "pages" as they call them.
> Extra effort in those areas might be better than maintaining different
> code for desktop vs mobile.
>
> That said, there are very real issues with map usage on desktop vs
> mobile. The way you click and move the map around uses different
> events and if you have a complicated desktop map with custom
> interactive functions you might feel better writing separate versions
> just to keep your sanity, and the size down.  BTW, jqm has nice
> "virtual" events used to normalize event handling, so you don't have
> to write separate bindings for mobile touches vs mouse clicks etc...
>
> I'm guessing that it was your IT consultant that talked about moving
> to a MVC framework. Of course that and OO are best practices, but I'm
> not sure if that really applies to your situation as much the
> consultant probably made it sound. Map complexity would mostly be
> handled by the maps api and a couple of their add-ons, which is pretty
> well streamlined in that regard. Are you in need of customizing beyond
> typical maps api usage? Your back-end technologies will most likely be
> the same for all devices, including the database to store your
> location data and even the formulas for calculating what to display,
> etc..  So keeping everything separate (MVC) will be helpful if you
> ever want to move to a different technology (different map provider,
> different database, make an app instead of a website maybe) but
> probably not too relevant for the issues you're facing now (different
> devices, complicated maps). I guess I might be rambling at this point
> so I'll stop here.
>
> On Feb 16, 1:55 am, Rob Maclean <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > Hello,
>
> > We have various versions of web apps that use Maps V3 API and Fusion
> > Tables to enable users to submit their own content to a map using a
> > simple form, and that content appears immediately on a live map for
> > others to see. It currently works OK on a PC but we're encountering
> > issues on some other platforms (e.g. iPhone / iPad to submit photos).
> > Going forward the primary usage will be on mobile and we need to come
> > up with a solution that is simple, modular, 'future-proofed' and will
> > able to be incorporated in apps (android and apple).
>
> > Here is a prototype example of one 
> > application:www.satpacktravel.com/kruger-sightings.html.
>
> > I've done some research and would really appreciate any / all thoughts
> > on the following. Some of this is copied from a recommendation from an
> > IT consultant, so would appreciate responses in as non-technical terms
> > as possible:
>
> > 1. Moving to a MVC framework and use of OOPS(Class/Objects structure)
> > concepts. This seems to be the best way to manage complex maps with
> > multiple versions of similar functionality?
> > 2. Move to have two different version of each map, i.e. map identifies
> > devices and then utilises 1 of 2 different codes. Is type of devices
> > (e.g. phone / tablet or PC or is screen size the best criteria)?
> > 3. We currently use JQuery. Happy to keep this for PC version. On
> > mobile version looking at JQuery Mobile vs. Snecha Touch.
> > Documentation and similarity with JQuery seems better with former? Any
> > advantages of Snecha?
>
> > Thank you for any and all help!
>
> > Rob

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Google Maps JavaScript API v3" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/google-maps-js-api-v3?hl=en.

Reply via email to