---------- Forwarded message ---------- > From: Dirk Hohndel <[email protected]> > To: Henrik B A <[email protected]> > Cc: Willem Ferguson <[email protected]>, Doug Junkins < > [email protected]>, Linus Torvalds <[email protected]>, > Berthold Stoeger <[email protected]>, Davide DB < > [email protected]>, Robert Helling <[email protected]>, Subsurface > Mailing List <[email protected]> > Bcc: > Date: Sun, 24 Feb 2019 11:40:28 -0800 > Subject: Re: dive site handling > > The issue with not pruning unreferenced dive sites is that over time you > might accrue a lot of garbage in your dive file. E.g., whenever you dive > with a Garmin Descent or similar dive computer (there are none right now) > that store GPS data, that creates a new dive site. Typically I then switch > to the existing one if I have been at this site before, which creates an > unreferenced site. Having all of those accumulate over time might be > annoying. > > I agree that having a new feature which prunes unreferenced dive sites is a good idea. I have a bunch of these in my log. If I was to scout a potential dive site using the planner, then I would refrain from using the 'prune dive site' feature and only do so occasionally. When I'm on a dive trip, I enter in the name of a dive site, sometimes misspelling it until I get a chance to find out the proper name & location, particularly when diving in non-English countries. This gives me duplicate entries for effectively the same dive site.
> > > …….snip...…. > > > Sorry again. I find 'country' useful. The further down you go with > taxonomy, the trickier it gets. But I'm certainly willing to reopen that > conversation as well. > > I too find the country useful. Some of the other fields in the taxonomy are less useful - it depends on the country/dive site, but I'm sure others like that information. ...Hartley
_______________________________________________ subsurface mailing list [email protected] http://lists.subsurface-divelog.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/subsurface
