[Loadstone] Feature wishes

Shawn Kirkpatrick shawn at odyssey.cm.nu
Fri Nov 2 23:50:21 GMT 2007


I don't think you'd want to give heading weight over distance. The problem 
with that is as if you're not approaching a point head on but to one side of 
it the angle gets steeper as you approach. If the program was taking heading 
in to account then it would start missing points as you got closer in favor 
of points closer to your direction of travel.

On Fri, 2 Nov 2007, David Greenwood wrote:

> You wrote..."The way we're trying it now is to remap the
>> keys so that a normal key press of the numeric keys would look in that
>> direction and a long key press would move the focus. I'm thinking the show
>> area function will be tweaked so it could be made to work in a given
>> direction. That way maybe a shift of a numeric key would bring up a list
>> in
>> that direction."
>
> Right on! I've been thinking on how this functionality could be implemented.
> I think your suggestion is a good one. Many times I am travelling around and
> press the 12 o'clock position on the 5-way button and get an unwanted
> intersection of a parallel street to my travel just because some road is
> crossing the parallele road at a shorter distance from me.
> Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe it picks this unwanted intersection
> because it is closer to the one I want and still in a more or less 12
> o'clock position, opposed to a 3 or 9 o'clock position.
> As you suggest, a list generated by the area function could do it, or
> another suggestion may be If in navigation mode, more weight could be given
> to a point displayed  based on how closely it fits the direction of travel
> rather than the distance.  Both would need to be taken into account though.
>
> Here is an example to illustrate where I'm going with this.  Ignore the
> equation--it is only an example.   If I am travelling in navigation mode, I
> push the 12 o'clock position on the 5-way button and Loadstone must decide
> between several points.  There is a point 100 meters ahead that is only 5
> degrees off the direction of travel, while there is a point at 60 meters
> which is 40 degrees off my direction of travel. The equation determining
> which point to choose could take the lowest value once you multiply the
> number of degrees off the direction of heading by the distance.  The point I
> want would have the value 500, (5 degrees times 100 meters),  while the one
> I'm not interested in would have the value 2400, (40 degrees times 60
> meters). .  The first one would be displayed.  It seems to me that currently
> the second one would be selected. This concept could be an option in
> exploration mode as well.
> As you may have seen from previous posts, I don't do math well before my
> morning coffee, and so excuse me if I'm way off on this.
>
> David.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Loadstone mailing list
> Loadstone at loadstone-gps.com
> http://www.loadstone-gps.com/mailman/listinfo/loadstone
>


More information about the Loadstone mailing list