The comment section of the next WP infobox is already used for comments included in the waypoint files. I use it for tower frequency.

I think the next WP infobox is fine. But the WP dist infobox can be optimized in a way that I guess ramy meant. Right now it shows "WP Dist" as the header, the distance as the value in the middle and the bearing in the comment section. Instead of "WP Dist" in the header it should show the name of the waypoint, since it is obvious that the value in kilometers (or miles...) is a distance and where else should that distance go to than to a waypoint. So the name of that waypoint would be the more interesting thing to know. Then the infobox would look like this:

<name of the waypoint>
<distance to that waypoint>
<bearing to that waypoint>

Actually, with "track bearing" activated, there isn't even a need for an infobox displaying the bearing to the next waypoint. So another option for either the next WP or the WP dist infobox would be:

<name of the waypoint>
<distance to that waypoint>
<comment (e.g. tower frequency)>

No matter what, displaying "WP dist" in the WP dist infobox is useless imho. I would greatly appreciate it if instead the waypoint's name was written there.

I agree with mue17pilot that the solution is to simply replace "WP Distance" with the name of the waypoint. However I would still like to have the Bearing info so there will be no need to use the additional bearing infobox.

Are you suggesting that the "Waypoint Distance" infobox shouldn't show the "Waypoint Distance" anymore?!?

No, the suggestion is that the "WP Distance" LABEL of the infobox will be replaced with the actual name of the waypoint. As a result, just one infobox will be sufficient to provide both distance and bearing to the next waypoint.

I agree with ramy, just change the WP Dist infobox title. It currently says "WP Distance", it would be much more practical if it said the actual name of the waypoint.

fixed in 32c9989ed8d42a81e7806efb6aca29e4a2e49e57