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/ --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
