events posted with distance from Home GZ

[ideology]

our personal view is that it's a clever idea, however if c@w isn't interested in doing it, then it's unlikely he's going to spend the time to do it, particularly if the request is phrased as "well do what the other person suggested" ("please" or "have you thought about..." go a long way when trying to influence someone)

if c@w's spending his time xml-ing the back end, that's even more clever than the javascript idea because an xml back-end will allow a new range of interfaces to the site (think iphone, blackberry and all sorts of things that haven't even been invented yet!) we think that more and more cachers will want to be accessing the site through mobile devices, so this will be a huge step for the site.

we think the best thing on this javascript-in-the-event-page idea is to put it on the http://wiki.geocaching.com.au/wiki/Geoc ... pment_List so it's not lost and can be picked up by a developer who is interested in it. who knows, if we ever get our mac development platform rebuilt we'll do it, but given we are travelling at the moment it is unlikely in the near future

[Guest]

if c@w's spending his time xml-ing the back end, that's even more clever than the javascript idea because an xml back-end will allow a new range of interfaces to the site (think iphone, blackberry and all sorts of things that haven't even been invented yet!) we think that more and more cachers will want to be accessing the site through mobile devices, so this will be a huge step for the site.

I don't disagree at all, in fact I've spent most of today making a crappy (I so suck at making GUIs) but baby step interface toward my end goal of a much better blackberry app then currently exists.

My comments were aimed at the misinformation that was being used to try and beat down arguments about JS were blatently false, if he doesn't want to code it, that's a valid reason, but some of the other reasons given weren't.

I agree about all the handhelds that are likely to be connecting, which is one reason I like this site much much more than geocaching.com, being so closed they'll force people in using sucky wap interfaces which are slow and clunky or force people into buying approved applications along with quarterly/annual fees to access more usable interfaces and that just plain sucks.

Yes they may be facilitating things, but they are content driven and they provide very little content, their users provide most of it.

[caughtatwork]

My comments were aimed at the misinformation that was being used to try and beat down arguments about JS were blatently false, if he doesn't want to code it, that's a valid reason, but some of the other reasons given weren't.

The JS hovers don't work on blackberry devices, so there's an example of JS being on but not working. Kind of sucks to not be able to navigate the site. Regardless of what position you have, JS does not work everywhere, every time and <noscript> is useless if the device tells the browser it's on.

Sorry to have offered my help. I will refrain from helping in the future.

[zactyl]

if c@w's spending his time xml-ing the back end, that's even more clever than the javascript idea because an xml back-end will allow a new range of interfaces to the site (think iphone, blackberry and all sorts of things that haven't even been invented yet!) we think that more and more cachers will want to be accessing the site through mobile devices, so this will be a huge step for the site.

My comments were aimed at the misinformation that was being used to try and beat down arguments about JS were blatently false, if he doesn't want to code it, that's a valid reason, but some of the other reasons given weren't.

You do realise they code and support this site in their own time and at their own expense? He was being polite in giving you some reasons for not spending his spare time doing something that is available elsewhere (Events page, Daily Email) and "I don't want to do it" is reason enough.

[Guest]

You do realise they code and support this site in their own time and at their own expense? He was being polite in giving you some reasons for not spending his spare time doing something that is available elsewhere (Events page, Daily Email) and "I don't want to do it" is reason enough.

I guess you skipped that bit of my posting... I'm going to stop posting now before I tred on any more egos, the point of my posts was lost long ago.

[Guest]

The JS hovers don't work on blackberry devices, so there's an example of JS being on but not working. Kind of sucks to not be able to navigate the site. Regardless of what position you have, JS does not work everywhere, every time and <noscript> is useless if the device tells the browser it's on.

Most people posting about this were intending about normal browsers, the blackberry and it's ilk are corner cases for several reasons, JS being the least of them, try being in the middle of no where with signal flucuating from 1 bar to nothing, on GPRS at worst and trying to browse the site while holding the phone as far above your head as you can to try and keep getting signal.

Oh don't forget tippy toes and some place just high enough to be dangerous when you fall off it, or at least hurt a lot...

Now that's a neat trick that some circus performers could learn from!

Sorry to have offered my help. I will refrain from helping in the future.

Stop being such a sad sack Hmmm reminds me of that ABC kids show from when I was a kid... any who...

[caughtatwork]

Ahh, I see, only normal browsers.

Well some of the JS doesn't work under IE 6 but works under IE7 as for IE8, don't know yet. I suppose I could do a browser detect and then change the script accordingly, but of course between IE6 and IE7 they changed the user agent string values. That would also not work for people who spoof the user agent string to pretend to be something else. Y'know all the usual reasons that sites, if they can, create the content server side so they don't have to worry about the JS running on the client side working for some and not others.

Sad sack? Please. You are misunderstanding my sarcasm. You are welcome on the site and your opinions are respected, but avoid having a go at me. That I take personally. You are free to disagree with me and my view, but allow me to have that view in the same way I respect your view. I may disagree but I avoid having a go at you.

Now that you have insulted me personally and you have chosen to take a final shot and run away, your position is clear.

[Guest]

Well some of the JS doesn't work under IE 6 but works under IE7 as for IE8, don't know yet. I suppose I could do a browser detect and then change the script accordingly, but of course between IE6 and IE7 they changed the user agent string values. That would also not work for people who spoof the user agent string to pretend to be something else. Y'know all the usual reasons that sites, if they can, create the content server side so they don't have to worry about the JS running on the client side working for some and not others.

Ummm I don't think anyone asked for everything to be in JS, just one function, although I did comment on how I thought *.gmap stuff could be consolidated and using browser caching.

Sad sack? Please. You are misunderstanding my sarcasm. You are welcome on the site and your opinions are respected, but avoid having a go at me. That I take personally. You are free to disagree with me and my view, but allow me to have that view in the same way I respect your view. I may disagree but I avoid having a go at you.

I never meant any disrespect what so ever, and by sad sack it was a character on a ABC TV show that used to mope about and say similar statements to the one I quoted. I never meant this as a personal attack but made an observation about what you said.

Maybe I'm just showing my age and you young whipper snappers don't have a clue as to my reference. Damn kids, get off my lawn!