Madpom > 2014/11/15 17:08

Yep - Sth island Cragieburn. Hamilton Hut -> long creek -> Back Basin Hide -> Tobacco Range -> Avoca Hut -> Sphynx saddle -> Anticrow Hut -> Bealey Spur Hut -> Hotel. Wonderful trip - can;t wait till we can move back home to the mainland for more of that!

Re help, etc. I have added help for the Trips page, which was missing, which - if read- would have explained what goes in the trip overview and what doesn't. . I've added an 'information for contributors' link in the About page. But the real problem is how to get across the fundamentals of 'what is a route', 'what is a trip', 'what is a story' so that people know what to add under each. A link hidden on the About page is probably not going to get read by most. I'm still leaning towards a big info (i) in the menu bar that gives you a 1-screen-max summary of 'what the current page is about'.. Any better ideas? - they'd be welcome as always...

Hugh vn > 2014/11/12 10:08

waimak - thats explains what I saw. And that an experienced contributor reidpaulnz didn't get the process right does suggest its not intuitive and more help/instructions are needed.

Happy tripping. The sth island craigieburn?

Madpom > 2014/11/11 22:20

Re: history page - drat - thought I'd done that one. Yes, needs doing. Simple change.
Re: wording - yes - can shorten that as suggested.

However, all that can wait as I'm off into Craggieburn for a week in the morning!

Re: Waimak: I (logged in as admin, though I didn't realise it at the time) copied 3 paragraphs out of the overview section of the trip reidPaulNZ had created, into the two routes now contained in the trip (the info concerned was a route guide rather than a trip overview). I mailed him asking him to take a look and see if he was happy with the changes, and suggesting he draw the route lines so that the routes can be published and appear on the map, but I haven't heard back from him Are you referring to the info that was repositioned? Or has something been deleted?

Hugh vn > 2014/11/11 21:13

Did Admin have to correct some contributions from reidPaulnz ? Some info in the waimak has disappeared ....

Hugh vn > 2014/11/11 21:12

small point - page real estate is in high demand,
Last updated by: Hugh vn on 2014-11-11 based on experiece on 2013-07-01. View history
could read
Updated: Hugh vn 2014-11-11. Experienced: 2013-07-01. View history



and does the actual view ' view history' also need 'Experienced' added to 'Updated' ?

cheers

Hugh vn > 2014/11/11 20:59

very impressive. Particularly liked the way the red borders came up with a prompt to fill the field when I tried to save without entering a date.

Everything you've achieved here is great - I'll keep jotting ideas when i think I've stumbled into an issue - you keep telling me when its not helpful :-)

(the forum view has corrected from what it was when i first opened 1/2 an hour ago, looks fine and is working fine now)

Madpom > 2014/11/11 16:59

Just for you ... I've cancelled my intended update today (implement comments fields) and instead plumbed in the 'experienced on' field for routes and places to the forms and displays and history!

Take a look. All historic entries created/updated before today have no "experienced on" date, but as from now anything anyone enters or updates, they must specify an experienced on date.

An example of one I have saved since the change was deployed is:

http://routeguides.co.nz/routes/291
(ROUTE GUIDES | ROUTE | BACK RIDGE BIVVY TO ROCKS AHEAD HUT VIA TRACK)

Madpom > 2014/11/11 15:03

Cheers Hugh - 'date experienced' has been on the to do list for a while now

But, regarding attribution -

We currently do show who is the author and when they wrote the article.
We currently do show a visible record of who updated each article (see 'View history') and when.

We currently collect (now mandatory when you sign up) real names as well as usernames for all new users. I display username because we all know who madpom and izogi and yarmoss and the rest are, because they are compact and memorable, because they are unique (which real names are not) and because very few of us would recognise those people's real names. Clicking on the 'by madpom' attribution takes you to madpom's profile page, which will show you the authors real name. Is this not enough? The only other option is to show both the username and real name , but that's a lot of real estate ...

All I believe is missing is the 'date experienced' - as listed on the to do list (see the link to 'Known issues and future improvements' on the home -> about page).

Do you agree, or am I missing the point?

Hugh vn > 2014/11/11 12:08

every route in the guide needs a date, when the information was known to be valid. Which is probably the date the author traveled the route. Somehow edits and updates will also need dates.

Personally I always want to know who is providing the info - I think you need authors and clearly identify people who add edit or update.