Adding Places, make it easier!

I wouldn't say that the idea that a place must be added to a specific map 'doesn't make sense'. In fact I would say that this could be a nice arrangement.

In my opinion the trouble is the current implementation, i.e. the UI. It's more than a little difficult to identify what's going on with the UI. This is one example (not the only one). The entire concepts of 'maps' seems vaguely defined as far as the interface is concerned at the moment, and yes I would say that's a problem.

1. How do I negotiate these different maps?


2. What is the relationship between maps?

Be careful not to make the mistake of confusing a broken implementation for a bad idea. Those are the worst sort of mistakes to make.

Let's explore the idea a little. Keep in mind that I have very little knowledge of how Platial actually works at the moment. Maybe Jason or someone else can elaborate.

Let's say every user starts with a default map, so new places are attached to this map. I can start adding places immediately without worrying about maps because they all end up in my default map automatically, which is probably what I would expect.

OK, continuing, let's say that a user is allowed to create any number of other maps for whatever purpose. For example, maybe I create a specific map for a project because I want to keep those places together, and off of my default map.

I could imagine searching for an apt and keeping a map of all the places I've looked at as well as other related places (realtor's offices, locations of restaurants, grocery stores, etc.).

I may want to preserve this map so that I have a record of my apartment search, maybe even include it in a weblog post or share it in some other way.

Let's pretend that I can move or copy places among maps. In my example, I might carry over some of the restaurants from the map for my apt search to my default map. I might also share those places more widely (or I may have gotten them from a public map to start with).

Maybe they're all seafood restaurants, so I decide to start a public map of seafood restaurants in Boston, MA. From there I build a more general map of all restaurants in the city by combining my seafood map with others.

At any time I can enable or disable all of the places from my various maps (which I'm assuming are essentially sets of places and maybe some map attributes), where enabling a map might mean adding the places from a map to the current view (which is the map as it appears in the browser window).

Again, I have no idea how Platial is actually set up but I don't see a problem with this arrangement. In fact this is probably just how I'd do it. Seems like like it would be reasonable to manage too, no? Am I missing something?

In reponse to tracy_the_astonishing:

Yes, I didn't do a good job with my original reply.

I wasn't suggesting that it isn't possible to do this stuff with Platial now. I was only trying to say that I think the idea of tying photos to maps makes a lot of sense.

I didn't really want to talk about it in terms of Platial because I think problems with the interface obscure the elegance of the approach.

Thanks for the reply. I've read through it and understand it.

When kopper asks the question "How the hell do you ADD a place to your map?" I read that as a criticism of the UI and not the capability or approach of the service. I happen to agree by the way that the interface is really hampering Platial (not Nearby so much).

Take for example adding a new place to the map.

After I log in. By the way after I logged in I had to refresh the page manually to get the 'My Platial' and 'Logout' links to appear (i.e. to update the menu).

1. I select 'My Maps' from the 'My Platial' menu.
2. Next I choose a map.

At this point I can see the "Add a Marker!" link. I'm not commenting on this first part of the process (everything above this point).

It's unclear what I'm supposed to do initially. If I hover over the text I can see that "Add a Marker!" behaves as if it's a link, but what I really want to do is drag and drop the marker icon on the map to set the location. That's not how it works.

If I click the link I get an "Add a Place" dialog and buried near the bottom is the choice that is closest to what I've wanted to do all along (drag a marker to the map). The exact wording of the option is, "or type a title first then click the map!"

It would take a while for me to describe all of the issues I have with this dialog so instead I'll just ask you if you're happy with it. Are you happy with it?

So then I type a title,

then move to the map to select the location,

and then back to the same dialog to choose an icon and a category,

I click the next button for more fields (starting with title and icon again),

and then 'next' again, which actually finishes the place.

Finally, it's unclear that I'm done.

So what's the problem.

1. Getting to the Add a Marker! link. It's difficult to find.


2. The fact that it is unclear what happens next (Add a Marker is a link that will open a dialog).


3. The way the dialog box is structured (e.g. Add a title and click the map is under the option of manually typing in the Lat and Long coordinates)


4. That I start in the dialog, click the map, and then move back to the dialog box to continue. This is a lot of hopping around.


5. I have to progress through multiple screens in the dialog to complete the task


6. The dialog box is poorly organized and repetitive.


7. The next button sometimes means 'next' and sometimes means 'finish'


8. There is never a clear indication that the place has been posted. I'm left to draw that conclusion on my own. A simple message to the effect of 'Submitted' would help, as would maybe a more distinct change in look between the 'I'm creating a new place' style and the 'I'm looking at the details of this place' style.
   

How I improve the situation?

1. Move the Add a Marker feature so that it is immediately available after logging in. New places can appear on a user configurable default.


2. The current map should be clearly indicated (it is currently, but only after I make a selection) and it should be obvious how to switch between maps (it's not currently). Maybe a change map link next to the name of the current map .


3. Allow the user to drag the marker to the map to set the location and launch the dialog (or some other alternative mechanism that would allow me to set the location first and then fill in the details).


4. Simplify the dialog box significantly and reduce it down to a single page. For example, it's probably not appropriate to find a link to the bulk upload tool here.


5. Each option in the dialog should stand on its own. I shouldn't be expected that I'm reading the entire dialog box from top to bottom every time (descriptions like 'or type a title first then click the map!' should be cleaned up).

You have a perfect example of how this might be handled better with Nearby, which is done really well.

I think Platial is very promising. I really like the approach behind it.

Thanks for your efforts!

In response to tracy_the_astonishing:

What is needed is for the user Places map (the default map) to be completed according to spec, which will happen eventually. It has just not yet made it to the top of the priority list because we're such a small team.

It seems to me that the site is much easier to negotiate from the "My Profile" page. Also, the profile page as-is makes a pretty good 'dashboard'.

What if:

The site loaded the profile page on login.

You took a look at the profile page with the idea that it was more of a dashboard, and reworked just a little. Having the option to add a marker and then choose a map directly from that page would probably solve kopper's problem (and I have a feeling quite a few other new users). Calling it something like a dashboard would give you a lot options for using that space going forward without interfering/competing with the map interface.

I think another point of confusion is that the default map isn't identified clearly. Am I right about that? Actually, it's almost as if the default isn't a map at all, but a view. Maybe this is what Jason meant when he wrote

> It doesn't make a lot of sense, I know.

What am I looking at when I login and load http://platial.com/ ?

What's the relatioship between that map and the maps I've created using the "Make a New Map" dialog/panel?

What's the relationship between

http://platial.com and http://platial.com/username/places?

It would go a long way if when logged in and looking at a map I could add a marker or I could see some interface element that clearly led me toward adding a marker.

What I'm getting at is that something seems strange about how this default view/map is handled. I was thinking of it as an actual map not unlike any of the maps at http://platial.com/maps. But that's not right is it?

I also want to say that I can appreciate how challenging it is going to be to get that shared map idea just right. Maybe makes sense not to lead with that, leaving people new to the service to figure out what they're looking at. For example when not logged in maybe http://platial.com/ should lead to more of a traditional page with a nice description of the service, link to the blog, a big, inviting registration link, and other informative and promotional content. Of course, I would expect to see a prominent link to the same map that currently serves as the homepage, relocated to maybe

http://platial.com/community/

There is nothing stopping a visitor from bookmarking the map if they'd rather avoid the homepage the next time they visit.

I worry that prospective new users may dismiss Platial out of hand right now. These same people may have gone on to be active members of the community.

Cheers

I couldn't figure out how to add a place. Which is probably why there are so few. I am not alone. I gave up and added it with the iphone.

Thinking about Platial maps for a few days, and that I can finally wrap my head around the key point of confusion. I believe that there's a disconnect between competing ideas about what a map is.

An end-user is going to think of a map as anything that looks like a map. People more familiar with the service (e.g. its developers) are going to be better able to make a distinction between something that may look like a map but which is in fact something else entirely, and an actual map (i.e. a collection of data and other attributes which define a particular object).

I'll have a discussion with myself to illustrate the point.

I connect to Platial and I want to add a marker to the default map. Conveniently, I'm looking at a map right after I log in. But there's no "Add a Marker" link, and apparently no other way to add one.

Me1: This is the default map, right?

Me2: Right.

Me1: I want to add a marker to the default map.

Me2: OK.

Me1: So show me how to add a marker to this map.

Me2: You can't do that.

Me1: But it's possible to add a marker to the default map, right?

Me2: Absolutely. In fact, every marker must be attached to a map.

Me1: And this is a map right?

Me2: Yes you were right in the first place. It's the default map.

Me1: So how do I add a marker to it?

Me2: It doesn't work that way because. First you must add a marker to one of the maps.

From the forums we know that

a) there is a default map;

b) every marker must be added to a map.

What does this mean when it comes to using Platial?

Here's my guess:

Every marker has to be added to some user created map, i.e. a map created by clicking the 'Create a map' link at

platial.com/username/maps

A user may create any number of these maps.

All of the places on all of these maps are combined to create one master (i.e. default) 'map view', which is a map that is automatically generated from the places on all of the other maps. So places are added only indirectly to the default map (which I'll refer to as 'single user composite map' so as to avoid confusion).

Furthermore, all shared places from all of these single user composite maps are combined to create a single, community map, which is actually a view composed of shared places coming from all of the single user composite maps.

So there are two levels of composite map:

First, each user has her own, and secondly there's a shared map consisting of all of the places from all of the single user composite maps.

We have two different concepts.

1. user created maps


2. single user and community composite maps

Importantly these composite maps cannot be added to directly.

Is that correct?

Regardless you need to do a better job of describing Platial for your users.

I would argue that simply describing the service as it is currently implemented is more important than immediately making any big changes. After all, Platial seems to be working for employees. What's special about that group? a) they are the people most familiar with the service and 2) they are the heaviest users of the service.

These two characteristics together seem to indicate that Platial works quite well as is (because very active users are able to work with it), but that the service isn't well documented or intuitive (because new users struggle to make sense of it).

When it comes to actually implementing changes aimed at making the service more intuitive, I have a suggestion.

Here's the idea:

Whenever a user is looking at one of these composite maps (her own or the shared map) provide the option of adding a marker (so the Add a Marker icon would be displayed anytime a user is logged in and looking at what appears to be a map).

When creating a marker on a composite map, the service would silently add the place back to some user configurable default map. So when dealing with a composite map the user would only be positioning the marker using the composite map, which would then be added one of the maps she created, which feeds her own composite map, and in turn funnels to the community map.

I contend that this describes the behavior most users would expect. What's more, I believe it works well. I'll give a couple of usage scenarios.

1. As a end user, I could start by looking at all of the shared places (on what I'm calling the community map) and, when I find that a place I know about that isn't represented, add it directly from where I am.

2. I could position markers relative to other markers already on the community map. Otherwise (currently), I have to look at a map, identify something that I want to add, then go back to a map of my own, where I no longer have the context of all of the other shared places, and then try to eyeball where I want to put it, add the place, wait for the change to show up on the shared map, and then maybe start all over again.

If I'm wrong about any of this, especially the nature of user created maps, default maps, etc., please correct me (please!).

Thanks for your efforts

In response to tracy_the_astonishing's comment:

Platial actually used to load on your profile page and I agree with you, but the argument against was that not everyone is coming to Platial to add places to their own maps. The platial.com landing page is our search page. It shows you search results.

So I understand the reasoning behind not having a profile page be the landing page, but simply as a matter of practicality, every service should start with a page describing what the service is about. Just to name a couple, Flickr and Twitter start with a page that's really separate from the service itself. Maybe you justify this to existing users by having a login button which redirects to a profile page.

Of course it should be possible to bookmark specific 'parts' of the site, and it can be a problem when dynamic sites force users through a single landing page. But that doesn't seem to be the case with Platial. If I'm coming to the site to search and not add a place to my map, then I can directly access the search page.

It sounds like there are two different issues here - the first, what should the landing page be, and in this case I'd say that it's an important opportunity to describe the service, communicate important information, and orient new users, and probably should be a page that accomplishes those things with a login and a register button.

The second issue is: where should users who are already logged in be directed? This seems like it would be more a matter of some debate. It seems like you could do a lot more with the profile page and make a case that it's the right option, whereas the search page is what it is. If we're talking about a profile page I agree it seems strange that users keep getting sent back to their profile page, which for a lot of services is someplace that you would go only infrequently, to update a setting for example.

If we think of it as more of a dashboard then it makes sense that users would keep returning to it; and especially while the search page is a work in progress, it might benefit everybody to emphasize Platial's ability to create personalized maps, with the option of sharing those places and then searching through all of the public places. I would definitely highlight a link to the search page from the dashboard.

You could offer the users the choice as a preference - do they want to default to their dashboard page or to the search page?

I'm glad you're still thinking about this. If I get a vote, I'm in favor of the sorts of changes I'm talking about.

I'd also suggest that you not treat it as just a development project. I think you could accomplish a lot by just taking the time to explain things to users. If you could do that in a week and it's going to take significantly longer than that to implement changes, then you should definitely take the time to explain things to users. More than just an interim solution, it's related to marketing and documenting the service and a worthwhile thing to do, regardless. This is a great opportunity because there's clearly a useful purpose for it.

Thanks.