Actually, being outside of the map, local search makes it confusing and
that's the problem of original and new solution so I think best bet would be
to move it inside the map.

On Fri, Jan 30, 2009 at 12:24 PM, Yaron Koren <[email protected]> wrote:

> Okay, I made a version of this change on Discourse DB:
>
> http://discoursedb.org/w/index.php?title=London&action=formedit
>
> Does this improve things at all? Or would a more radical change be better?
>
> -Yaron
>
>
>
> On Wed, Jan 28, 2009 at 2:00 PM, Yaron Koren <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Well, in the change I'm talking about, the "local search" input would not
>> be on the map, but under the map, just as it is now - only the text would be
>> different.
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Jan 28, 2009 at 1:43 PM, Sergey Chernyshev <
>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> Yep, that's what what I was actually looking for - to have interface like
>>> local search (text field and button on the map) but make it perform
>>> geocoding instead.
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, Jan 28, 2009 at 1:34 PM, Yaron Koren <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Yeah, that LocalSearch is a very intuitive interface. The fact that you
>>>> can't set the text, and thus change the language, might be a deal-breaker,
>>>> though.
>>>>
>>>> What about just making the existing address-lookup input look more like
>>>> LocalSearch's? I'm imaging something that looks like this:
>>>>
>>>> ----------------------
>>>> | Search the map     |  Search
>>>> ----------------------
>>>>
>>>> (Hopefully that fixed-width formatting showed up correctly.) The input
>>>> itself contains a gray "Search the map" string, that disappears as soon as
>>>> the user clicks in the input; then there's a "Search" button or link next 
>>>> to
>>>> it that the user presses to do the actual lookup.
>>>>
>>>> Potential solution?
>>>>
>>>> -Yaron
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, Jan 28, 2009 at 1:17 PM, Sergey Chernyshev <
>>>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> 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/
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> 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
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to