Online search

[Andrew Heard]

The latest LM4 beta 4.17.2.3 appears to have gone "backwards" regards to sharing with Google Maps. Has there been a change not in the release notes? Sometimes when I use the workaround of GMap > long tap > share > Locus sometimes now brings up the online search text box with "push pin" as the text. No use at all. Other times the location is unrelated to the desired GMap location. So now no GMap "share" workaround seems viable?

[michaelbechtold]

@Radim et.al: don't you think below deserves an answer?

[Tapio]

Maybe Google changed their output? However, an easy way for newbs is missing. And Locus should definitely understand latlon and pluscode formats in its new search.

[Marek Scholtz]

Hi guys,

there were some small changes in handling point sharing from Google Maps to Locus Map. If you encounter problems also in next version, please, let us know.

[Andrew Heard]

Maybe Google changed their output? However, an easy way for newbs is missing. And Locus should definitely understand latlon and pluscode formats in its new search.

@Tapio - how to test? I tried sharing a G-Map point with text clipboard > notepad but it just pasted text "red pushpin". I guess the clipboard supports multiple content types simultaneously.

[Tapio]

Maybe Google changed their output? However, an easy way for newbs is missing. And Locus should definitely understand latlon and pluscode formats in its new search.

@Tapio - how to test? I tried sharing a G-Map point with text clipboard > notepad but it just pasted text "red pushpin". I guess the clipboard supports multiple content types simultaneously.

IDK. I am convinced Menion knows how to intercept that "send to" mechanism.

[Andrew Heard]

probably been mentioned before, but every time I use online search I feel I'm battling/ pushing uphill; example search for close-by road in Web Planner - first three suggestions are on the other side of the earth; why aren't these suggestions sorted by distance to the users position?

https://web.locusmap.app/en/?lat=-42.836418&lng=147.290826&z=15&map=hikeBikeYou cannot view this attachment.

[Andrew Heard]

The latest LM4 beta 4.17.2.3 online search appears to have gone "backwards" regards to sharing with Google Maps....

The latest LM4 beta 4.17.2.4 appears to have gone further "backwards" or at least sideways? My simple use-case, which to be honest is just a hack workaround, because LM4 search is not capable (sorry guys), is

• Google Maps app
• long tap to create red push-pin
• drag-scroll to find the Share option
• tap Share
• tap LM
• now observe, even worse than in 4.17.2.3 LM displays a list of POI over 20,000km away

BUT with correct local address 1km away and no way I can find to re-position to that local address - "so close yet so far" ;-( Funny - at least the list items are sorted by distance ;-(

Google Maps app:
You cannot view this attachment.

LM4 Online Search results after tapping the GMap Share button:
You cannot view this attachment.

BUT I can confirm that a long tap in LM4 will also display the correct address:
You cannot view this attachment.

The Google Maps website shows many results much closer than 20,000km, including the desired one, and which LM would also correctly find:
You cannot view this attachment.

[Tapio]

Yes, we can only copy paste lat,lon. And I doubt many users will find the place where to paste it into Locus.

[Andrew Heard]

Latest Google Maps. No improvement with Share to LM4. Exactly the same poor behavior.

[Tapio]

Latest Google Maps. No improvement with Share to LM4. Exactly the same poor behavior.

But in the other thread they said it's fixed - new version just isn't out yet.

[Jan Čapek]

Hi, I posted few notes regarding search and sharing from Google Maps here:
https://forum.locusmap.eu/index.php?topic=8572.msg72919#msg72919

I should have post it here and send link to that topic, but nevermind.

[Jan Čapek]

@Jan - sorry to sound like a broken record (for those old enough to remember) but why would I (as a user) want to see search results from >1000km at the expense of results I know for sure are closer? Sure, put them at the bottom of the list, but sort by distance surely? MUST?

Because what if you want to find something far away instead? For example New York - there are hundreds of places called like that. The app will never know for sure whether you want to find pub called New York 30km away or New York city in the USA. So it must provide compromise which suits both cases.

But I agree the current state is not optimal. It has to do with two things:
1) It can't find places what you want to find (translations/dictionary issues).
2) We don't yet have enough data in order for "smart" sorting be better than sorting by distance in lots of cases.

[Andrew Heard]

Because what if you want to find something far away instead? For example New York - there are hundreds of places called like that. The app will never know for sure whether you want to find pub called New York 30km away or New York city in the USA. So it must provide compromise which suits both cases.

@Jan. We have to agree to disagree. The online search provides results for countries I don't even have maps for. Crazy stuff. Suggestion - add user preference to sort-by distance, or sort-by "LM4 relevance". Maybe add analytics to see what is the preferred use-case, my money is on the former. As @Joeloc said @ https://forum.locusmap.eu/index.php?topic=8572.msg72940#msg72940 my online search workflow has now become GMap > share > LM4 because the results make sense.

[Tapio]

Maybe zoom level as an indicator of users scope wish? Zoom level low: User likely wants to find "New York City" in the US. ZL high: wants to find the local "NYC brothel".