Canalplan Bug Tracker



Anonymous Login
2019-06-26 02:38 BST

View Issue Details Jump to Notes ]
IDProjectCategoryView StatusLast Update
0000565Canalplan [All Projects] Internal Improvementspublic2019-02-23 15:21
Reportercanalplan_19939 
Assigned ToNick Atty 
PrioritynormalSeverityminorReproducibilityalways
StatusassignedResolutionopen 
PlatformChrome and IE, probably allOSWin 10OS Version
Product VersionProduct Build 
Target VersionFixed in Version 
Summary0000565: Ampersand Code error
DescriptionPage: https://canalplan.org.uk/place/bljd

Lock rise displays as:
"This is a lock with a rise of 19' 4"."

due to Ampersand Code error, from source

"

This is a lock with a rise of 19' 4".

"

Which should read
"

This is a lock with a rise of 19' 4".

"
Additional InformationThe display of lock rises is inconsistent: for example, at page:
https://canalplan.org.uk/place/2fs4

The rise is displayed as:
"This is a lock with a rise of 11f1."

I think it would be great if they all followed this (coded) form:

"

This is a lock with a rise of 19′ 4″ (5.9 m).

""

TagsNo tags attached.
Attach Tags (Separate by ",")
Attached Files

-Relationships
has duplicate 0000566closedNick Atty Report 0000565 
+Relationships

-Upload File
Select File
Maximum size: 5,000 KB
+Upload File

-Notes

~0002213

Nick Atty (administrator)

There are at least two issues here. One is around displaying the rises when there is a quote mark to indicate "feet". The second is around the inconsistency in how the heights are abbreviated. The first feels more important than the second, but it may be easier to fix both together.

Ideally they would all be turned into an internal dimension and then formatted for display. Indeed, I thought that was what happened, but quite obviously not from your two examples.

~0002214

Nick Atty (administrator)

Flight rises are handled nicely, but individual locks aren't. There's a lot of work needed to fix them properly - in particular that some rises are just given in decimal without you knowing whether they are feet or metres and that some are given as ranges or comments like "tidal".

I think I'm going to add an internal field for normalised values, and convert them in batches, while adding some restrictions on what can be entered.

~0002215

Shultzy (updater)

I think that the earlier versions of CP had them in the 99ft9 format which I think we should keep with the addition of the metric equivalence, 99.9m. Maybe the [Edit] page could offer imperial and metric boxes with only one to be entered and the other calculated and then displayed in the format 99ft9 (99.9m). Locks with a fluctuating depth should be labelled "variable"

~0002216

Nick Atty (administrator)

It's always been a free-flow text field. Lock flights were converted a few years ago to be stored in mm and converted into feet and inches, or metres depending on your preferences, and I think I need to do the same here.

The need for "variable" makes it a bit more complicated, and the multiplicity of formats used make converting them from text to mm a big complicated.
+Notes

-Add Note
Note
View Status
Upload File
Maximum size: 5,000 KB
+Add Note

-Issue History
Date Modified Username Field Change
2019-02-23 08:43 canalplan_19939 New Issue
2019-02-23 09:47 Nick Atty Relationship added has duplicate 0000566
2019-02-23 09:47 Nick Atty Assigned To => Nick Atty
2019-02-23 09:47 Nick Atty Status new => assigned
2019-02-23 09:49 Nick Atty Note Added: 0002213
2019-02-23 13:06 Nick Atty Note Added: 0002214
2019-02-23 14:40 Shultzy Note Added: 0002215
2019-02-23 15:21 Nick Atty Note Added: 0002216
+Issue History