QUOTE (The CEO @ September 02, 2013 03:26 pm) | ||
When using the plugin to show a map of the highest caches I found myself during my summer holiday, I also experienced that it is quite difficult to limit the map to a specific region. What I therefore have been considering myself lately is adding macro parameters "state=", "country=" and "county=" Together with the existing "num=" this would make it possible to easily show the highest X caches in a specific state(s), count(y/ies) or countr(y/ies). However, the num=X would still apply to the combined set of e.g. states. So if you would want the 5 highest caches of California and Nevada, you may still get 4 or even 5 caches in California because all caches in Nevada are lower than these 5 in California. If I understand you correctly you would want e.g. the top 3 of each state, so for 6 states 18 caches would be shown? If that is the case, I have to think about whether I can easily add that, because I suspect it will become a lot more complex, also in how to present this in the output. E.g. should I then show 6x a marker with (1) on the map? I suspect I will start with adding the region-limiting macro parameters first, and then maybe add this later. If the additional macro parameters are implemented, an alternative could be to use the plugin multiple times, so you get multiple maps (e.g. one for each state). Feedback is appreciated. |
You do understand the request, the top 3 in 6 states I list for a total of 18.
One of the solutions I was looking at with the present implementation is the exclude approach. This could work by excluding the ones I don't want to show from the list of candidates. My problem was trying to deal with them as parameters to the macro. Perhaps a text file? One per line? I could then make a selection of states in my found database, after sorting on elevation and then use a user flag to mark the ones I want to exclude. A fairly simple macro can then write the text file with just the codes. If your macro will then read the file it would do the trick and be easy to manage.
Using the plugin multiple times is workable, but I suggested to lignuaqua that maybe if the custom maps could be grouped then I could display them by groups, instead of one long scroll forever string of maps. So I guess I would be a bit opposed to the long string of maps result.
I have no issue with the exclude approach if it could be made more manageable.
Thanks for considering my request.