I’m sorry, Justin, but could you please point out to me, how you think I was hounding you? My post expressing a desire to have some kind of idea on an ETA wasn’t even directed at you. I didn’t quote you, didn’t include you with an @, just expressed the hope that someone on here could have some sort of idea on an ETA. Now, because I saw the risk that you might read my “prayer”, I included a few sentences expressing my gratitude for the script and that I knew I was not entitled to any work on that script. And that I understood you might well have better things to do with your time. I expressly said that I was not able to fix anything myself and – like most here – completely reliant on your “kind help and mastery” (to quote myself) for a solution. To this, you replied with an informative post I neither asked for, nor really expected, for which I thanked you by hitting the thumbs up-button on your post. I wasn’t going to post anything on the subject after that. But then @ehepner1977 (who seems to bear a grudge after a run-in I had with him last year) decided to label i.a. my question as an expression of entitlement.
I had no intention of hounding you, and still don’t. I don’t think I am entitled to anything you do, but still harbour hope that you’ll somehow – and for reasons of your own choosing – fix this PIE-script I still like and miss. But I will survive if you don’t, and I’ve come as close to begging as I’m going to get.
Hepner may equate my expression of hope with entitlement. He might, for that matter, also equate admiration for a Ferrari with grand theft auto. And if you were to think he’s 100% correct in doing so, you may also do that. I’m not going to argue you (or him) over that. It would be futile, for lack of common ground. I’m hoping, though, that you don’t and that I somehow totally misinterpreted what was said on the subject.
And now I’ll still go back to hoping that you’re willing to ignore all this debate on the subject of the prophet’s beard. And that you’ll still find a cure for PIE. And that you’re not petty enough to punish all editors for that one git, who dared to express hope. I would still consider that a pretty good bet. Petty people usually aren’t good enough team players to help their community out with helpful scripts that won’t earn them anything more than (mostly silent) admiration from that community.
Now, I’ll shut up and go back to that quiet hope and admiration mode. I wish you all the best.
Thanks for the update. One issue still remaining on my end is that I can type in the opening hours in the box for opening times of a plce, but clicking add hours or replace hours doesn’t have any effect.
Toolbox updated or disabled? I have no issues with PIE adding hours. I had that same problem, but it was a script interference issue, and the updates resolved it. PIE is 2023.07.14.01.
Hi, does PIE influence the sorting of suggestions of the External link? If so, could this be sorted so the nearest is always on top? And perhaps a cap to not show results more than 20 km away or whatever arbitrary number we can come up with?
It’s happening for local addresses that are far off (screencap 1, top one is ~45 km away from the actual one in the red box), but regularly you get other side of the world suggestions (screencap 2, Canada is ten thousands km away from The Netherlands).
On the topic of external links. Would it be possible to have an option to mark places that are missing an external link?
Since the script is already marking duplicates or long distance links. Maybe it could mark linkless POIs as well? Typically a place has a Google place as well so it could help improving the map.
New bug in WME 2.180 – select a place, click the address field to edit it, then click in the House Number field. The field will be underlined in blue, indicating that it is active for editing, for about one second – then it will deactivate (lose input focus), and hitting a number key will not have any effect on the house number (although it may have side effects elsewhere).
