search

theCrag / website

theCrag.com: Add your voice and help guide the development of the world's largest collaborative rock climbing & bouldering platform
https://www.thecrag.com/
110 stars 8 forks source link

Allow merging of multiple routes eg multi pitche routes #3367

Open dmucli opened 5 years ago

dmucli commented 5 years ago

It would be useful to be able to merge more than 2 routes together, especially when cleaning areas where each pitch has been created as a single-pitch route (eg the nose p1, the nose p2, the nose p3 etc.).

At the moment if you need to merge 8 pitches together as one route, you have to merge the routes together 7 times. Unless there is a better way? (sorry if that is the case)

Tasks:

brendanheywood commented 5 years ago

This probably needs to be a special case, we should NOT do a basic merge here as it will screw up everyone's log books who has ticked these 1 by one. The most common use case is when you just have logged the first pitch. We need a specific multipitch merge process that maps the route to each pitches in the final route

lordyavin commented 5 years ago

I would like to point out that there are users who prefer to have the individual pitches of a route entered individually. And there have been a discussion about this. Therefore you should always address the users before merging and put the merge to discussion.

lordyavin commented 5 years ago

BTW: The index is a tree model, why not introducing a pitch node as child of a route?

dmucli commented 5 years ago

A benefit of having pitch node as child of a route could also be that you can give name + description to pitches when relevant (eg. many routes on El Cap have names for pitches eg "Changing Corners" on the Nose etc).

brendanheywood commented 5 years ago

If there is an argument to have them as a new node under a route then you may as well just make them separate routes. Especially if people tend to climb them and mix and match, eg shared first pitches and then split off. Or in the case of a big wall you might log them on different days. El cap seems like a good candidate for splitting

lordyavin commented 5 years ago

Problem with individual pitches is that they pollute the index listing and it is not clear if they are connected. This meta data has to be set in the description which is free text, using a feature node or annotations (btw I don't like annotations). Therefore it is hard to enforce consistent description and structuring of multi pitches. My idea is to give advanced users the option to do more fine grained edits supported by the system to get consistent information. At the end the index displays routes with child-pitches the same as routes edited currently. Of course you need to decide if the model extension is reflected to old data and if the "usual/current" editing will map on that or if old and new model coexist. Maybe this could enhance the logging/ticking of multi-pitch routes too.

lordyavin commented 5 years ago

A possible "new" candidate for a new pitch-node feature: Valhalla 9a+, Getu, China

Luen commented 5 years ago

Another candidate for merging - https://www.thecrag.com/climbing/australia/glasshouse-mountains/tibrogargan/area/12228931 - However, pitch 1 seems to be the same for Aphelion and Voyager. What's the best method to deal with this?

@lordyavin

"there are users who prefer to have the individual pitches of a route entered individually"

you can log separate pitches by clicking on "log pitches", doesn't this have the same outcome as creating a child node of a multi-pitch?

@brendanheywood You could still mix and match pitches of different routes by using the 'linkup' button, I believe that this feature can use more love (like auto suggest and linking of routes, auto entering the grade and height of the selected link up)

It would be good to see in the route's page other possible routes that stem from the anchors - like a tree graph.

brendanheywood commented 5 years ago

First step is draw a good topo so a non local can see what is going on, after that it is usually more obvious which way to go

lordyavin commented 5 years ago

@Luen yes the outcome should be the same.

brendanheywood commented 5 years ago

It would be good to see in the route's page other possible routes that stem from the anchors - like a tree graph.

This is exactly the purpose of a topo, consider routes like these:

image https://www.thecrag.com/climbing/australia/arapiles/tiger-wall-area/route/12911425

image https://www.thecrag.com/climbing/australia/mt-coolum/route/11812483

A picture is worth a 1000 words, and if you merge the pitches or don't, the topo still ends up looking the same either way. Both of the examples above, in Getu and Tibro, are missing a route topo and this is way more important to get right first.

brendanheywood commented 5 years ago

+1 from Ryan for Tibro https://www.thecrag.com/climbing/australia/glasshouse-mountains/tibrogargan/area/12228931

brendanheywood commented 5 years ago

+1 from forum thread https://www.thecrag.com/discussion/2476091178/troposphere-restructure#m2478299736

Quote from forum:

Yes we can merge routes but this is designed for merging two routes which are conceptually the same route duplicated. So if you have ticked both of them (say on different days) then you properly end up with two ascents of that single route afterwards.

But it doesn't work correctly with merging 3 single-pitch routes into one 3-pitch route because then it will look like someone who ticked it once as 3 ticks will now look like they climbed the whole route 3 times.

In a newish crag with not many ticks I'd say go for it and merge, but in this case there are hundreds of ticks like this.

If it was just about messing up people's logbooks then some small amount of breakage might be ok. BUT it's also about the overall stats: if we merged them right now it would make a 4 pitch route look like they have 4 times as much traffic. eg currently Squealer is the most popular route on Tibro, but if we merged it as-is then Troposphere would suddenly leapfrog to the top and become by far the most popular route in all SE Qld, overtaking 3 men a ladder at Coolumn, Idiot wind at KP, and dozens of other trade routes at other more popular crags.

(Note: if you think that stats don't matter think about the Grampian's and the random numbers being thrown around. They matter to me)

So the interim workaround I suggested to Ryan was we do it in a few steps:

1) We create a new multi-pitch routes for each of these, and everyone can start ticking these from now on

2) We remove the descriptions of the old ones and just say "Don't use, but also please don't merge or delete". We could move these down to the bottom of the list so they are out of the way.

3) When we get the time to implement #3367 we'll circle back and merge it all back

The alternative is we simply do nothing until #3367 is done, and then clean it all up then.

brendanheywood commented 5 years ago

+1 from email