Trailforks Website Feedback & Suggestions

PB Forum :: Trailforks Feedback
Trailforks Website Feedback & Suggestions
Author Message
Posted: Jul 27, 2019 at 8:28 Quote
markholloway wrote:
Freischneider wrote:
Different rating for mountain bike and hiking. When hiking there are very different evaluation criteria than the mountain bike. A hiker says the trail is 5 stars and a mountain biker says it's 2. So there's no good predictive value of the rating. It would be good if you can do the assessment separately for each activity. It would be best if you call the rating so you still have to choose for which activity you give it. A field must be active and not filled with the last activity.

We have this already. When adding/editing a trail be you can add difficulty based on activity type. Its located just under the main rating selection, "add different difficulty per activity type ".

I do not mean difficulty but Vote with stars.

The app is great. I go on Hike and Vote 5 stars and I go on MTB and Vote 3 stars. Then I see 5 stars at Hike and 3 stars at MTB.
But the homepage is not. I go up on hike and vote 5 stars. Then I go up on MTB and vote 3 stars. Then I go back to Hike and then there are 3 stars in it.

Posted: Jul 27, 2019 at 8:28 Quote
Some suggestions for trail usage details especially in light of expanding outside of just mountain biking. I'd like to see something more like this:


1. Selection of primary trail use should allow for more than just "everyone" and "only one type". Switch to checkboxes, not sure about how this is handled database-wise but might need some backend work to change this attribute to a list rather than a single value. It should also (obviously) be ensured that primary trail use selection is a subset of allowed trail use selection, error returned if not.

2. Remove separate 'E-Bike Allowed' field; this is redundant and already handled in the 'allowed trail use' list.

3. Remove separate 'Winter Trail Map' field; this is also redundant and can be deduced based on access information (if only 'winter' uses are selected for 'allowed trail use', then it shouldn't show on summer maps)

4. Add new attribute for minor local/neighborhood trails. This attribute should be handled similarly to connector trails, but are orthogonal to connector trails in that they can be longer and often have their own names and ref numbers (esp for USFS trails). In my neck of the woods, this feature would be useful for something like this or this, where the trail isn't a short connector trail, but doesn't need to show up at low zoom on the map, or especially doesn't need to clutter up something like the exported "trail conditions" tables that many trail advocacy websites use to display local trail conditions.

Posted: Jul 27, 2019 at 9:44 Quote
You should be able to change your approval/rejection vote when confirming a trail - if something is off but it gets fixed you should be able to change your vote.

Posted: Aug 1, 2019 at 13:00 Quote
Minor UI nit: The input forms for data with 2 elements (specifically URL and Title, but possibly others) is not always consistently ordered. In the "Description" section it's "title, url" but in the "Links" section it's "url, title".

Mod Plus
Posted: Aug 1, 2019 at 13:09 Quote
b0bg wrote:
Minor UI nit: The input forms for data with 2 elements (specifically URL and Title, but possibly others) is not always consistently ordered. In the "Description" section it's "title, url" but in the "Links" section it's "url, title".

they are the same on trails but I see on the region form they are like you say, i'll fix.

Posted: Aug 2, 2019 at 8:46 Quote
Sun2306 wrote:
You should be able to change your approval/rejection vote when confirming a trail - if something is off but it gets fixed you should be able to change your vote.

+1 to this. I made a rejection but the original submitter followed up with canonical maps from the land manager and it turns out my feedback was wrong. Would be nice to be able to rescind it/change to approval. I suggested he revise his edit to include the source map link, which is nice to have in any case, but it would be awesome if I could change my Thumbs Down => tup

Posted: Aug 4, 2019 at 19:07 Quote
Would love to see integration with Wahoo.I would love to be able to favorite a route and it sync to my ELEMNT Bolt.

Posted: Aug 9, 2019 at 16:31 Quote
I would like the ability to rename and recolour timed segments in a route without having to delete them and recreate them.

Thanks

Posted: Aug 12, 2019 at 5:35 Quote
Smart watch integration would be an amazing feature; I find myself stopping regularly to pull my phone out to see if I'm still on a trail or route. To do it quickly on a smart watch would be much more user friendly!

Posted: Aug 13, 2019 at 9:49 Quote
Has any work been done to investigate/fix the errors in elevation on all of trailforks? Every route I look at is adding thousands of feet of elevation gain to a climb. This is frustrating as a planning big rides requires me to know exactly how much distance and elevation I am dealing with. I can't trust Trailforks for this.

Mod Plus
Posted: Aug 13, 2019 at 15:09 Quote
Yes, I am investigating it right now. I am looking at multiple elevation service comparisons and user ridelog results. Can't give details right now. It's a bit slow with Crankworx going on. Having developers that are lifelong die-hard mountain bikers has some amazing benefits when it comes to the app. But doing development during events like this is just not one of them. :-)

Posted: Aug 14, 2019 at 9:12 Quote
todd wrote:
Yes, I am investigating it right now. I am looking at multiple elevation service comparisons and user ridelog results. Can't give details right now. It's a bit slow with Crankworx going on. Having developers that are lifelong die-hard mountain bikers has some amazing benefits when it comes to the app. But doing development during events like this is just not one of them. :-)

Glad to hear it's being investigated.

Posted: Aug 26, 2019 at 10:43 Quote
Is there a problem with the elevation generation?
Rode lord of the Squirrel yesterday and trailforks show a 2900m elevation gain. I believe it should be more in the 1700m range.
https://www.trailforks.com/ridelog/view/8277277/

Same happen with this ride where it should be more 900m instead of the 1200m
https://www.trailforks.com/ridelog/view/8184654/

Thanks

Posted: Aug 26, 2019 at 12:26 Quote
frriv31 wrote:
Is there a problem with the elevation generation?
Rode lord of the Squirrel yesterday and trailforks show a 2900m elevation gain. I believe it should be more in the 1700m range.
https://www.trailforks.com/ridelog/view/8277277/

Same happen with this ride where it should be more 900m instead of the 1200m
https://www.trailforks.com/ridelog/view/8184654/

Thanks

Yep, sounds like the Trailforks crew is aware and is working on it.

Posted: Sep 10, 2019 at 11:09 Quote
Could you add the functionality for users to change their votes in confirming content? I've run into a couple cases where the contributor has made corrections according to feedback but my rejection cannot be removed.


 
Your subscriptions
no posts

Copyright © 2000 - 2019. Pinkbike.com. All rights reserved.
dv56 0.010211
Mobile Version of Website