Yep, I agree - clearing the input seems odd if you clear the input, but if
it's kept, then it's not clear to the user why that address is not saved,
but coordinates instead - this can be solved by the in-pan control like
Local Search or similar where it's sort-of clear that this window is only
for looking stuff up.
As for reverse geocoding, I think it well depends on the use case - for
things like specifying location for the event, it makes sense to know where
it is but not knowing the address or another example - when you need to post
location of the address of the Deli you go to every day - you know where it
is on the map, but has no idea about coordinates or address. The question is
if it should be used for entering map coordinates or for entering addresses
(another type of data).
Sergey
On Wed, Jan 28, 2009 at 1:09 PM, Yaron Koren <[email protected]> wrote:
> Thanks for this feedback. The first suggestion - do automatic lookups,
> clear the input as soon as a lookup succeeds - seems odd. If you type in a
> whole address, then realize there was a typo in the number, you'll have to
> type it all again, no?
>
> Ooh, that LocalSearch control is neat - really neat. I've never seen it
> before. It might be worth looking to see if it can be integrated with the
> rest of the form input. One possible downside, though, is that the text it
> uses (like "search the map") is probably not internationalizable.
>
> It might make sense to increase the map size. This is already a settable
> parameter, by the way.
>
> Reverse geocoding, AKA finding a street address from a selected point,
> might be more trouble than it's worth - if the place the user is entering
> has a street address, it seems like the chance would be much higher that the
> user knows that address than that he/she knows its location on the map.
> Plus, if the user wants to enter just coordinates and not an address, say,
> for privacy reasons (if they're entering their own location), this might
> just confuse the issue. Yes, you could argue that entering coordinates is
> itself giving up your privacy, but I would guess that at least some people
> enter a point in the general area of where they are, just so they can show
> up on a map.
>
> -Yaron
>
>
> On Wed, Jan 28, 2009 at 12:44 PM, Sergey Chernyshev <
> [email protected]> wrote:
>
>> I was terribly disgusted with the interface when I started to use it on
>> TechPresentations.org - it definitely needs some improvement.
>>
>> My thoughts - as tosfos suggests, it's better to update non-editable area
>> based on either user clicking on the map or by using lookup. In addition to
>> that I would suggest that lookup should happen when field is changed,
>> without user even pressing a button - once lookup is successful, it should
>> clear up lookup field. The only question is how to separate direct input
>> from looked up input - we should either rely on Google's geocoder to return
>> what was entered or try to parse the string and see if it's coordinate
>> (first one is easier and might suffice, second one helps not to rely on
>> Google geocoder service to be constantly available). Another addition might
>> be have same configuration, but to add in-place editing for the coordinates
>> value if the lable is clicked.
>>
>> Another alternative is to use LocalSearch control on the map instead of
>> lookup field:
>> http://code.google.com/apis/maps/documentation/examples/control-localsearch.html-
>> it's quite neat and might be what we need. If this functionality is not
>> what user wants, than similar control just for geocoding might need to be
>> developed.
>>
>> In addition to this, I think default size of the map should be increased
>> significantly because right now it's too easy to move the cursor beyond
>> visible area and it become unclear if coordinates changed or you need to
>> click some point on the map to change those coordinates. Maybe it's worth
>> showing coordinates of current cursor to give user feedback that he needs to
>> click the map to change the resulting coordinates.
>>
>> BTW, I wonder if it makes sense to use reverse geocoding, new feature of
>> Google's -
>> http://code.google.com/apis/maps/documentation/services.html#ReverseGeocodingor
>> maybe it's worth creating separate extension similar to
>> http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:Google_Geocoder
>>
>> Sergey
>>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Jan 27, 2009 at 10:39 AM, Yaron Koren <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> Tosfos - that's an interesting suggestion.
>>>
>>> Barry - well, even if the map input becomes user-configurable, I'd still
>>> like the default to be as nice as possible. But I guess your sample code was
>>> also a recommendation for the default layout and text.
>>>
>>> -Yaron
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tue, Jan 27, 2009 at 9:44 AM, Barry <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> I'm in favor of giving the form designer as much control as possible.
>>>> Could the "field" be entered as three coordinated fields?
>>>>
>>>> In addition to:
>>>> | '''Geographic coordinate''' in the form "<nowiki>45.4564°N,
>>>> -23.456°E</nowiki>".
>>>> {{{field|coordinate|input type=googlemap}}}
>>>>
>>>> How about adding:
>>>> | '''Enter address of location.'''
>>>> {{{field|coordinate|input type=googlemap_address}}}
>>>> |-
>>>> | '''Or, enter geographic coordinate''' in the form
>>>> "<nowiki>45.4564°N, -23.456°E</nowiki>".
>>>> {{{field|coordinate|input type=googlemap_coordinate}}}
>>>> |-
>>>> | '''Or, find the location on the map'''.
>>>> {{{field|coordinate|input type=googlemap_map}}}
>>>>
>>>> You could link them together by the field name and still support
>>>> the existing version as with type="googlemap"
>>>>
>>>> You could even allow the form designer to include only one or two of
>>>> the fields,
>>>> so a cartographer could use the coordinate field and leave off the
>>>> address.
>>>>
>>>> (I know this is at least an order of magnitude more difficult than
>>>> rearranging the form elements,
>>>> but you asked...)
>>>>
>>>> - Barry
>>>>
>>>> On Jan 26, 12:49 pm, Yaron Koren <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>> > Hi,
>>>> >
>>>> > I've gotten the sense recently that some or many users find the
>>>> Semantic
>>>> > Google Maps form input confusing, especially when they first try to
>>>> use it.
>>>> > To refresh your memory, here's an example of the form input in action:
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> http://hackerspaces.org/w/index.php?title=Santa_Fe_Complex&action=for.
>>>> ..
>>>> >
>>>> > It consists of three parts: an input of geographical coordinates
>>>> (which is
>>>> > what actually gets saved to the template), a map input (which also
>>>> sets the
>>>> > coordinates), and an entry for placing an address, then looking up
>>>> that
>>>> > address (which sets the values of both the coordinate and map inputs).
>>>> With
>>>> > that many inputs, and the lack of any explanatory text, it's no wonder
>>>> that
>>>> > some people get confused.
>>>> >
>>>> > So: does anyone have any thoughts on ways the input could be improved?
>>>> > Perhaps the two text entries should be reversed, with the address
>>>> lookup on
>>>> > top? Or maybe one of the text entries should be placed to the right of
>>>> the
>>>> > map, instead of the top or bottom? Maybe "look up coordinates" should
>>>> be
>>>> > changed to "look up address"? Or maybe that text should appear,
>>>> unlinked,
>>>> > before the entry, with something like "Go" appearing after the entry
>>>> as the
>>>> > actual link?
>>>> >
>>>> > Any thoughts are welcome. Also, if you know of any existing inputs on
>>>> the
>>>> > web that do something similar, that would be helpful to know about
>>>> too.
>>>> >
>>>> > Thanks,
>>>> > Yaron
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Sergey Chernyshev
>> http://www.sergeychernyshev.com/
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
> >
>
--
Sergey Chernyshev
http://www.sergeychernyshev.com/
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Semantic Forms" 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/semantic-forms?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
