Quadrangle Progress tables

[tracyfoutz]

John,
I really like the feature where under each individual state, I can go to the state's "Quadrangles List" and then select the state's "Quadrangle's Member Area." From there, I can select a member's name in the "View Member progress:" box, and then click on the "Look Up Member" button. That gives me a complete listing of all quadrangles and in the last column on the right it indicates which quadrangles are "done" by that particular member. From this list I can click on any quadrangle name for a list of peaks found on that quadrangle. Depending on which state list of quadrangles I am reviewing , I get one of two types of tables when I click on the quadrangle name. For Arizona, California, Colorado, Idaho, Nevada, New York, Oregon, and Washington, I get a table with a heading that reads: "Quadrangle Progress - 'member name':" and then the name of the quadrangle followed by the state name it is located in. Below the heading is a 5-column table with various column headings, and the last column has a heading that reads "DONE?" and below that heading is a check mark for every peak listed in the table rows that the member has done.

This result is helpful for a quick glance of what peaks on certain quadrangles a specific member has done. However, it isn't working for the states of Montana, New Mexico, Utah, and Wyoming. When I click on a specific quadrangle name form any of those states' member progress quadrangles lists, I get a 4-column table (instead of a 5-column table) with a heading that reads: "Quadrangle:" and then the name of the quadrangle followed by the state name it is located in. The last column with the heading, "DONE?" is missing for the states of MT, NM, UT, & WY.

Sorry to be nit-picky but I though I'd make you aware of this inconsistency. Is it an easy fix?

[John Kirk]

Very easy fix. Those states were completed before I implemented that feature, and I didn't go back to add in the member string to the url. On a similar note, I haven't forgotten about your request for quad progress maps consistently applied to all states - just need some time to get to it (like example below):

link removed as page is replaced with newer version...
http://www.listsofjohn.com/Quads/quadsmap.php

[tracyfoutz]

Thanks, John!
I had forgotten about my earlier inquiry. That will be cool too. U da man!
Tracy

[John Kirk]

As promised...
http://www.listsofjohn.com/Quads/quadsmap.php

Also found from the Home page: Member Profiles, Stats, Tools ->Tools->Quadrangle Progress Maps
and within each state's Quadrangle Menu bar

[tracyfoutz]

John,
This is way cool. Another thing that is cool is that quadrangles are only counted complete when ALL 300-foot prominence peaks on the quad are completed regardless of what state the peaks are in. It used to show me having completed Hoover Dam quad in NV but not in AZ. I like the changes.

BTW, Ute Quadrangle in Nevada shows in the list of NV quadrangles (as well as on the new map) as having one, 300-foot prom. peak; however when I click on the "Ute" quadrangle name or map cell, no peaks show up on a table, list, or map. That may be an error that needs correction. I'm not sure if there is or isn't a 300-foot prom. peak in that quad

Also, I sent you a PM on another matter.
Tracy

[John Kirk]

John,

BTW, Ute Quadrangle in Nevada shows in the list of NV quadrangles (as well as on the new map) as having one, 300-foot prom. peak; however when I click on the "Ute" quadrangle name or map cell, no peaks show up on a table, list, or map. That may be an error that needs correction. I'm not sure if there is or isn't a 300-foot prom. peak in that quad

This was a remnant from the way I originally had peaks referencing quad boundaries as WGS84 coordinates. I corrected all peaks based on quad boundaries being NAD27 about a year ago, but never updated supplementary info in the quads table. I had already automated the quads table based on what the count of peaks are in the master peaks table, but it didn't remove entries for quads that no longer have peaks. I added more script to clean up all of these going forward if the counts don't match in either table, so you shouldn't see any more oddities like this.

[tracyfoutz]

Thanks, John
It looks like that did the trick!

Tracy