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/
>
> >
>

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
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