Starting time, ending time or both? (Timed Waypoints)
-
We're interested in your opinion regarding route/waypoint timing. This morning we had a discussion regarding setting a "Starting time/date" for your route, this is a feature we will add. However, alternatively, we could also provide the option of setting an "Ending time/date" which would effectively result in a route being calculated backwards from the ending time.
At this point we are uncertain if it should be added. Please let us know what you think we should do:
Only add "Starting time/date"
Add both "Starting time/date" and "Ending time/date"
Only add "Ending time/date" -
BOTH! :), perhaps also the option for duration can be added, along with having the start or ending time.
I.e.: From starting waypoint for certain amount of hours/mins or km to next waypoint? -
My take on this is both, but with one caveat. One of the really good things about MRA is its simplicity. If doing both options makes things a little too complicated both in terms of programming for MRA and in terms of usage, then only do the start time. Remember, the reason many of us want to move away from Basecamp is, it is too challenging to use partly because they tried to cram too much in.
-
My take on this is both, but with one caveat. One of the really good things about MRA is its simplicity. If doing both options makes things a little too complicated both in terms of programming for MRA and in terms of usage, then only do the start time. Remember, the reason many of us want to move away from Basecamp is, it is too challenging to use partly because they tried to cram too much in.
@Gary-France Valid point, although i would love having the choice between all 3 options.
I notice from time to time that very useful features are available but too well hidden for a casual user to find it;
I would vote fro a very well thought through user interface, and a help function (and tool tips ...) integrated with that interface.
-
There are times when arrival time is critical, for ferries etc.
For me though, 99% of the time there is no time, just the joy of the journey.
I hope therefore that we are not “forced” to enter times and they can be left blank however many options there are?Steve.
-
Both, start and end time are helpful options when planing trips and to calculate when you need to start your journey or to estimate you arrival time.
However, this makes only sense if you can also incorparate time for breaks in the overall timing.
Long ago, I was using an offline route planning tool that did allow to plan refreshing breaks as well - you could let set the planner stops after a certain driving time with a predefined amount of time. By that you could clearly distinct what is the pure driving time and how long the journey might take, including the necessary stops.
Obviously you can calculate the time for breaks manually. But giving an arrival time and knowing only the driving time, is only part of the information. -
We're interested in your opinion regarding route/waypoint timing. This morning we had a discussion regarding setting a "Starting time/date" for your route, this is a feature we will add. However, alternatively, we could also provide the option of setting an "Ending time/date" which would effectively result in a route being calculated backwards from the ending time.
At this point we are uncertain if it should be added. Please let us know what you think we should do: Only add "Starting time/date"
Add both "Starting time/date" and "Ending time/date"
Only add "Ending time/date"This would be useful to address the issue about planning routes during the winter time when mountain passes are closed due to snow for trips you will be making in the Summer...so a date and time.
If you trip is in May when most of the passes are open it doesn't give you much time to plan the routes in advance.
