Groundspeak Portal

Variables are good, don't get me wrong, but many categories seem to get too fine grained in defining variables.

For example, for some categories there are variables for entering the hours that the waymark is open or available.  The simplest way of entering this would be a free form text box, a single variable.    However, most categories have drop downs to select the hour/minute for weekdays, hour/minute for weekends, and sometimes additional ones for Saturdays and Sundays in case they are entered instead of the weekend one.

If I'm waymarking a commercial establishment, often their website will list the hours, and it would be much easier to just cut & paste the hours from their site into a single text box.   But instead sometimes this turns into 12 different variables.

For hours, it gets worse.  By having a strict set of  variables for weekdays, weekends, it doesn't allow exceptions ("Closed Monday, open Tuesday 9-5, open Wednesday-Friday 9-9).


Similar to hours is addresses.  First, why bother with addresses since I have coordinates!  With addresses, you often have to enter multiple lines of text, including the country & state which is redundant with the country/state information that is already required for all waymarks.


Are there good reasons to break down these variables to such a level instead of having fewer top level variables?  

I think there's been another thread on this same issue.  It is true - esp. for hours!  First, they are often difficult to find, so they should always be OPTIONAL.  (Libraries are the only ones I've consistently been able to find hours for).  Second, they often very for different combinations of days, or seasons.  I've seen categories try to compensate for this by asking for weeday and weekend hours, or even more - just a nightmare to fill out, and even then not all situations are covered.  Some categories, like Libraries, DO use the text box and it is so much easier.

I'm less negative about the addresses, but it is true that a text box is easier and quicker than the multi-line box.

I created a few of my early categories with WAY too many variables (like Municipal Parks), but at least they are nearly all optional.  I think I have a better balance now, and try to have only meaningful variables and still make most of the optional.

I agree that this is a real annoying issue. Mostly it is probably an "it seemed like a good thing at the time" type thing without foreseeing the issues that would be created by a features limitations. The quick fix would be to make the only variable box available for these types of variables a text box by default. Groundspeak should consider losing the multiline variable boxes in order to simplify future categories.

The problem here is that it doesn't address the problem completely.  If I go back and change my address variable  to a text box do I lose the work that previous waymarkers have done by eliminating a variable style and using a different one? 



 

silverquill:

I created a few of my early categories with WAY too many variables

Me too.   I have one that is even redundant. I have a variable in my first category that is not optional and replicates the title of the waymark.

I'll drop into that cat and eliminate that variable to see if I lose the data there since it is redundant anyhow. Vital info will not be lost and I can answer my own question above about changes in variables.


Edit to add

OOOH tread lightly when fiddling with the variables. When I went in and edited the variable I mentioned here it gave me the option to delete the variable. When you do this the previous information is deleted as well. Poof....gone

I still don't know if a slightly altered variable say from an hours variable to a text box would result in lost info but now I am to scared to try. My first attempt eliminated all previous redundant info for the 484 waymarks in that particular category.

Yes, we've talked about this once before and it basically came down to a "live and learn"

Groundspeak was very kind to offer us so many options. But now that we've seen how it can become unmanageable or confused I would say that only a few are actually needed.

But for categories that already exist it is impossible to change them as data would be lost. I did that with Tim Horton's as I was willing to ditch some useless data.

Address as a variable is one that irks me a great deal. I would much rather see it as a text box than the overkill it is. Address is for those without GPS units to be able to find the spot. Of course, I think that is just silly. You shouldn't play this game without a GPS, and even if you don't have one... use Google Maps. Except for Benchmarks, can't almost every Waymark be found by looking on the map?

If there was a way to send an email to the listing author for every one in the category to let them know to update their listing... that would be cool. Trouble is that some people have moved on and the data wouldn't be updated. Maybe if Nate's idea of allowing people to update the variables as part of a visit was incorporated then it would work.

BQ

Yes hours and address are really nothing more than filler as far as variables are concerned. However an easy fix (if you can edit) is to simply make them optional. This is especially helpfull with the address variable. When a waymark is being written up, any fields (street, town) can be filled, and it won't freak out because you've no clue what the zipcode is.

team farkle 7:

Yes hours and address are really nothing more than filler as far as variables are concerned. However an easy fix (if you can edit) is to simply make them optional. This is especially helpfull with the address variable. When a waymark is being written up, any fields (street, town) can be filled, and it won't freak out because you've no clue what the zipcode is.

For most categories I would agree the address field is really not needed, however there is one category where address is nearly required as coordinates are not enough.  Try visiting a waymark  in the NRHP category in a city without either the address or the photo with you.  I would guess you will guess the wrong building at least half the time.

BruceS:

For most categories I would agree the address field is really not needed, however there is one category where address is nearly required as coordinates are not enough.  Try visiting a waymark  in the NRHP category in a city without either the address or the photo with you.  I would guess you will guess the wrong building at least half the time.

So true! 

The worst is the NRHP Contributing Buildings category where there maybe a half-dozen or more in a single block, etc.  Even with the best coordinates it would be difficult to pinpoint them.  In this case, the physical address is part of the identification of the site being waymarked and is a valid piece of information to require.

Seems to me there is a statue or monument type category that has a variable for an address - a bit unrealistic.  Sometimes just a street name is good enough, (maybe to distinguish it from other similar waymarks in the same city, such as fast food places, or a general description of the location.