Add Sightseeing View #2357

New issue

Open

opened 2022-04-07 09:36:34 +00:00 by alensiljak · 8 comments

alensiljak commented

2022-04-07 09:36:34 +00:00

(Migrated from github.com)

A follow-up for #1577, specific to the use case of visiting a location as a tourist or a business trip. Please suggest a better name!

The focus is on:

transportation (stops, lines)
accommodation
customizable POIs (as for every view)
restaurants and bars
tourist attractions
- museums
- ruins, fortifications, castles
- monuments and art exhibitions in the open
- galleries
- etc.

A follow-up for #1577, specific to the use case of visiting a location as a tourist or a business trip. Please suggest a better name! The focus is on: - transportation (stops, lines) - accommodation - customizable POIs (as for every view) - restaurants and bars - tourist attractions - museums - ruins, fortifications, castles - monuments and art exhibitions in the open - galleries - etc.

👍 8 👀 1 ❤️ 1 🚀 1

pastk commented

2022-04-07 14:17:29 +00:00

Member

I wonder if its any different from the current OM experience? I.e. the most generic map which tries to "fit all".

👍 1

alensiljak commented

2022-04-07 14:23:29 +00:00

(Migrated from github.com)

Of course, these views are mostly related to the POI groups. So, the result of how that feature is implemented will have a huge impact on what these views really represent.
Other than POIs, I think emphasizing certain features graphically would be useful. I.e. for bicycles or pedestrians. The tourist view, however, most likely refers to the POIs only. The rest of the view is pretty-much standard. I.e. no need to emphasize parks or certain types of paths. You have a point there.

I partly agree with that point. But it is not really the "fit all" approach. For example, if you live somewhere, you will rarely want to know where the tourist office or a famous monument is on the map. But if you're visiting a place you've never been to, these are of the primary interest, usually. The same for Wikipedia or other tour-guide-type articles. I'd love to be able to explore an area I've never been to just by using the map in this mode. OM has the best selection of the relevant detail on the map I've seen so far. So, something like that but from the perspective of a person new to an area would be great. Of course, these views are mostly related to the POI groups. So, the result of how that feature is implemented will have a huge impact on what these views really represent. Other than POIs, I think emphasizing certain features graphically would be useful. I.e. for bicycles or pedestrians. The tourist view, however, most likely refers to the POIs only. The rest of the view is pretty-much standard. I.e. no need to emphasize parks or certain types of paths. You have a point there.

pastk commented

2022-04-07 14:42:11 +00:00

Member

I get your point, thanks!

If we have two views (a "regular" one and a "tourist" one) then

They should have clear names so that a user could understand the difference easily by just looking at the name / icon.
The views themselves should be different enough (otherwise a user would switch between them and wonder what's the point).

If there are subtle differences only then it won't justify adding another entity I think.

I get your point, thanks! If we have two views (a "regular" one and a "tourist" one) then 1. They should have clear names so that a user could understand the difference easily by just looking at the name / icon. 2. The views themselves should be different enough (otherwise a user would switch between them and wonder what's the point). If there are subtle differences only then it won't justify adding another entity I think.

👍 1

alensiljak commented

2022-04-07 14:51:41 +00:00

(Migrated from github.com)

If there are subtle differences only then it won't justify adding another entity I think.

Yes, I definitely agree on that. As mentioned, it will depend on how useful the POI selection and grouping turns out.
Also, it's a brainstorming suggestion so let's see what turns out of it. Perhaps I should've created it in the Discussions section (can't get used to it, still) because that was the real intention. I don't have a concrete proposal at this stage.

> If there are subtle differences only then it won't justify adding another entity I think. Yes, I definitely agree on that. As mentioned, it will depend on how useful the POI selection and grouping turns out. Also, it's a brainstorming suggestion so let's see what turns out of it. Perhaps I should've created it in the Discussions section (can't get used to it, still) because that was the real intention. I don't have a concrete proposal at this stage.

j13m126 commented

2022-04-07 17:01:50 +00:00

(Migrated from github.com)

I like the idea of a tourist and local (regular) view.
the tourist view could have an icon with a human and a trolley in it, the local view an icon with a human in front of a house.

Here is another idea: how about only hiding the icons of irrelevant POIs in tourist/local view, but not the name. The interface would be less cluttered with irrelevant icons while not taking anything away. Take a supermarket: It might not be the most important POI for a tourist, but might still be of value when you want to know where you are or which direction to go.

I like the idea of a tourist and local (regular) view. the tourist view could have an icon with a human and a trolley in it, the local view an icon with a human in front of a house. Here is another idea: how about only hiding the icons of irrelevant POIs in tourist/local view, but not the name. The interface would be less cluttered with irrelevant icons while not taking anything away. Take a supermarket: It might not be the most important POI for a tourist, but might still be of value when you want to know where you are or which direction to go.

pastk commented

2022-04-07 17:24:21 +00:00

Member

Yes, definitely, we have different means of POIs prioritization: using different icons sizes, leaving only text / only icon, changing zoom levels when POI becomes visible, etc.

👍 1

biodranik commented

2022-04-07 17:57:32 +00:00

(Migrated from github.com)

@pastk what about removing completely the generic "fit all" map style and focusing on specialized ones? It could greatly simplify everything.