Existing problems reported with 28
- I received a error code 500 (server error) whilst uploading this review. No photographs were uploaded and the review has uploaded twice. Reported 27 Jun 2022
- Inconsistency in photo thumbnail display for portrait oriented photos (and one other), possibly linked to the process by which they were uploaded. E.g. Rombre 2 thumbnails on route Overview page. Photos 1-7 uploaded with route: portrait photos = 6, 7: both thumbnails are portrait. Photos 8-21 from a review: portrait = 17: thumbnail is landscape but only shows middle part of photo - missing the full scope. Photos 22-28 from a photo survey: portrait = 22, 24, 26: thumbnails are all portrait. But photo 28 is different again as the photo is actually landscape (just! 1280 x 1251 pixels) but the whitespace surrounds the thumbnail display as if it were portrait. Is this is a new feature? I remember "portrait" thumbnails like photo 17 before. I'm not sure it's a success as the amount of white space now on the page rather defeats the purpose of a quick view of thumbnails, particularly when using a landscape computer screen. Maybe the whitespace could be shown as vertical white bands within portrait thumbnails so the on-route-page alignment and white space doesn't change? Or just return it to all being like 17 again - is there a functional need for full scope thumbnails for every portrait oriented photo? Reported 29 Dec 2023
- Echoing the two previous reports. It is evident that the reviewers for Salkin one are travelling along the first legs of the Clarendon Way (Salisbury to Winchester, via King's Somborne) based on their own knowledge of the path - Salkin two and Salkin three being review-led efforts to resolve this. It seems to me that Salkin one just needs the GPX updated to accurately reflect the route being reviewed, and then Salkin two and three can be removed to reduce clutter. This would help people who are less familiar with the area. Let me know and I'll be happy to provide an accurate GPX file. Reported 24 May 2023
- I noted this was reported. My route won't upload because the start and endpoints don't match but I put both into my OS Maps program and included them in the route? "When uploading a route the start and end points have to match the pre-existing choice of start and end already on the website. It shouldn't matter if a route goes from the existing "end" to the existing "start", i.e. is inverted. (e.g. Chippenham to Calne is the same as Calne to Chippenham - either direction should work.)" Reported 26 Apr 2021
- Hi I've just seen your email asking for applications for storytelling commissions. I have some questions I can't see the answers to. [I'm looking at the Colchester-Norwich waylist, so I'll talk about that] - Doing the entire 90mi walk in one go seems unlikely! Am I right that I can break it up in any way I want? eg. can I walk 1.5 routes on one trip, 0.5 route the next time, 2 the next, etc. Or for a given route do I have to have walked that in one day? [I think the answer is that it is very free form - as long as I have genuinely walked it, and the photos will confirm that, I can do it however makes sense] - the goal seems to be adding 3 reviews for all the routes in a waylist (so for each of the 9 routes in this waylist). Does it have to be the same 3 people for all of the routes? eg. could I walk Colchester-Manningtree with Alice and Bob, then Manningtree-Ipswich with Bob and Charlie, etc. Or does it have to have a “core” of 3 people that do all the routes? THanks, Anthony Reported 02 Feb 2024