Online search

[freischneider]

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".

This is not practical. So the user must first set the zoom level and can only then search.
It doesn't matter if places are displayed 1000 km away. The important thing is that he can make different sortings. And here the sorting by distance will be in the first place and also belong to the default setting.
If it is sorted by distance, I don't care if there are places with 1000 km distance at the end of the list. It is only important if I sort the distance by GPS or by the center of the map. Here I would set default also map center.

[Tapio]

This is not practical. So the user must first set the zoom level and can only then search.

No I'm saying it could use the maps current zoom level (and map position) for its priority decisions. But well, they may already do that.

[Jan Čapek]

But well, they may already do that.

Yes, we do. This is indeed super complex topic under the hood.

To be brutally honest, I wouldn't mind if you completely removed online search from Locus.

Well, you don't need to use it then. In reality Locus Map can't rely on other apps to search places nowadays. We are well aware that choosing beforehand where to do search is not up to today standards. That is why we are changing it.

I see that by offline you mean local user content search and by online the one similar to Google. In reality it is more complicated than that. But I am confident it will do exactly what you described as preferred in your post in the end (+ it finds you even the mountain   ). 

But it will take some time so thank you for your patience:
1st stage - online general places (adresses&POIs&..) search (we are here)
2nd stage - offline general places search
3th stage - revamping other local searches

All stages will be combined together in the end, so you will just have to type the string and then do the choosing from the result offerings - presented in the way to suits all scenarios in best possible compromise. Not want to go into the details there now, long way to go. Of course, you will still be able to search just in your tracks for example.

@Andrew Heard @joeloc and others:
We hear you all and thanks so much for your feedbacks. Apparently too often search of local places is rubbish and we will do our best to do something with it.

Until then, we didn't removed old offline address and POI searches. They are still there in its current old-school form. With those the app for sure would not be returning results from countries of which it hasn't downloaded map.

[freischneider]

I like what they're trying to do. I think we are too impatient. But this way, good ideas may still come.
My idea:
Right now I have to select search in tracks. But if I want to search in online addresses, I have to change it and start a new search. That is multiple selection in the menu.
Here you could set a default setting where everywhere is searched. If I get too much I can briefly deselect a few search types and then have fewer results. The whole thing also the other way around, add search types.
But with a new search is always first the basic setting that I have set.

[freischneider]

Another idea about other search providers (GMaps, Bing...). Who wants to use these does not need to use the online search here (simply deselect the search type). What would be useful, however, is a link to another search provider (app, or website) The link can be set up if you want to use it. When setting up you can still write a note to it.
The icon for this could be placed at the top of the menu. Better would be directly in the search (possibly on the far right).
Of course there is the possibility to place a link to an app in the sidebar. But for some, it is already too full. and simple users do not use it normally. Another area would be the main menu, where I currently also start the search. But at the moment you can only place locus internal functions there and no foreign apps.

[freischneider]

Perhaps the topic should be renamed: Online / Offline Search

[slarti76]

I do see the complexity in combining all searches together, and I can live with having to select different search "means". But one major bother, that should be not too difficult to change is this:
Everytime the search scope is changed, there's a new, empty input field. Why not prefill with the search term already entered in another search? All the time I start typing into a search field before realizing I have the wrong search - then I change it and have to start from scratch (unless I thought of that and copy-pasted the term, which of course is also a bother).

PS: I just realized that this works between internal point and track search, but that's the only place I found.

[michaelbechtold]

...
Until then, we didn't removed old offline address and POI searches. They are still there in its current old-school form. With those the app for sure would not be returning results from countries of which it hasn't downloaded map.

As a Computer Scientist and IT professional since more than 40 years I appreciate that your roadmap is havy lifting. But by the same token I can confirm that you and your search team completely fail re. rule #1: "Do not screw your customers!"
You are "proud" to not have removed offline POI and address search? Well, removing the last straw would have been complete suicide.
Keeping Google based search in its place as it worked for 10 years, alongside your new search, would have been professional. You would get feedback from the geeks who dare the new stuff, while offering propoer search results for all others, while you do your homework for step #2 and #3.
And if there should be pride and emotions in the way of doing that: both do not pay your bills. Be smart instead.
Cheers
Michael (from Radium Hot Springs)

[freischneider]

I think Michael's idea is a good one. Keep the old online search and start the new search (beta) in parallel. At the first start of the search (beta) a note so that you should post errors, improvements here in the topic and so that you can still use the old search in case of need.
In the first post here, should be added in bold what they have in mind and how the current timetable is. This can then be adjusted weekly. Then many questions, criticism, etc. would not arise.
I myself use the search very rarely. Nevertheless, I try to help here, because the development of Locus Map is important. In addition, I do not want so that important users (geeks) are annoyed and jump off. because they also often help me with very special applications.

[Tapio]

I do not want so that important users (geeks) are annoyed and jump off.

Nobody jumps off or should jump off just because of search. And there's no alternative to LM anyway. People shouldn't forget what we have.
Personally I don't care about the new search too much. For some reason, I don't like the presentation of the new searches results.
Offline POI handling needs improvement, Menion knows that.
I either use Gmaps->Locus or do Nominatim based search, Tasker->Locus.

[Jan Čapek]

@michaelbechtold Would you or others please share some examples of searches (exact term together with your map/cursor location and app language) where our new search fails and where old Google (still available in Locus Map Classic) works fine to try to replicate? I am not telling new search is better, but want to be sure we don't miss anything here as I am frankly surprised how unusable you are reporting it is. It is for sure possible we are getting better results on our end because of combination language app, search term language and OSM POI data with their name translations.

Please separate it from the problem with sharing POI from Google Maps. I think that is clear now and it is separate issue/project for us.

As mentioned before, we think we know well what has to be improved or changed now in order to get better results or be more intuitive. But as we soon to jump on it again, I want to be sure we really have clear picture of all issues.

For some reason, I don't like the presentation of the new searches results.

Would you please elaborate a little?

[Tapio]

For some reason, I don't like the presentation of the new searches results.

Would you please elaborate a little?

a) I mean on map
b) Eg search a category like "parking". A lot of other POI are displayed. Didn't ask for those
c) Tap beside poi, on map - under some circumstances the results stay on map, sometimes they disappear. Need to go into search again.

[T-mo]

I recommend to use and test the search as much as possible.
As user experience it doesn't appear as a very sophisticated result though I would love to give a different feedback.
I also suggest -again- to orientate to very evolved solutions like e.g. G-maps with regard to HMI and result presentation. I could tell a lot, but all is said and the rest might be catched by comparison.
It's not about database - which is understood as not being the plan (and hopeless to reach at all), probably might target sth. more basic and komoot'ish.

Nevertheless, just try and add a town-name as basic location description concatenated with another string of an idea to search for..
(if you only use the kiosk name it will be found as shown, being unique enough).

Another example: search for 'Rewe' you will get results, if you search for 'Bochum Rewe' you get no results. This definitely makes no sense.

[Andrew Heard]

Regards the latest 4.18.2 online search results & sharing from Google Maps. For me, it's the same experience as reported in previous beta 4.17.2.4 @ https://forum.locusmap.eu/index.php?topic=8436.msg72716#msg72716. Although the release notes mention search improvement (maybe compared to 4.17.0??), so I didn't notice any change.

[Tapio]

OLC Search (4.18.2) failure:

HGVV+465, Lünen - not found.
should be
51.592763,7.543109