View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
Billy Twigger Founder member
Joined: 30 Aug 2005 Posts: 352 Location: N55 51.686 W5 05.647
|
Posted: Fri Jan 20, 2006 6:11 pm Post subject: Mystery PQ |
|
|
I just received a PQ and along with the usual .gpx file was a strange new waypoint file.
The accompanying email said:
201710-wpts.gpx: This additional GPX file contains supporting waypoints for your Pocket Query
Whats that all about then? |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Haggis Hunter Founder member
Joined: 29 Aug 2005 Posts: 2487 Location: The building site formally known as Edinburgh!
|
Posted: Fri Jan 20, 2006 6:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Possibly due to the fact that as a cache owner you can add additional waypoints to your cache, such as parking or intermediate multi cache co-ords. _________________ Let me know if I say anything that offends you
I might want to offend you again later |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Billy Twigger Founder member
Joined: 30 Aug 2005 Posts: 352 Location: N55 51.686 W5 05.647
|
Posted: Fri Jan 20, 2006 7:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
A-ha!
Does this look familliar to you?
This is what I get when I download the additional file to Memory Map |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Haggis Hunter Founder member
Joined: 29 Aug 2005 Posts: 2487 Location: The building site formally known as Edinburgh!
|
Posted: Fri Jan 20, 2006 9:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Yes it does, and in your opinion is it worth the effort updating my cache pages? _________________ Let me know if I say anything that offends you
I might want to offend you again later |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Haggis Hunter Founder member
Joined: 29 Aug 2005 Posts: 2487 Location: The building site formally known as Edinburgh!
|
Posted: Fri Jan 20, 2006 10:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I don't understand how you have part of the waypoints as listed RYKC, as this is akin to my CITO event. It also won't allow you to have the same prefix, hence HA - HH, or the same lookup code, David Bellamy's World is listed from PARTA - PARTF and EAST.
Have you changed any of the codes, otherwise it looks as though it's all tits up, here is David Bellamy's World so that you can do a cross reference, as I am confused to the waymarks being named wrong? _________________ Let me know if I say anything that offends you
I might want to offend you again later |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Wildlifewriter Founder member
Joined: 04 Aug 2005 Posts: 948 Location: Norn Iron
|
Posted: Fri Jan 20, 2006 11:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
There's something horribly wrong there. BT: was the file passed through GSAK (or anything else) before you plotted it?
Here's what the GPX file, directly from gc.com, should look like...
-Wlw |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Billy Twigger Founder member
Joined: 30 Aug 2005 Posts: 352 Location: N55 51.686 W5 05.647
|
Posted: Sat Jan 21, 2006 12:18 am Post subject: |
|
|
Yes - all my gpx files open up in gsak, so I looked at it there first before exporting it to MMap
Did I do something wrong? |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Wildlifewriter Founder member
Joined: 04 Aug 2005 Posts: 948 Location: Norn Iron
|
Posted: Sat Jan 21, 2006 1:27 am Post subject: |
|
|
Billy Twigger wrote: | Did I do something wrong? |
I dunno - what did you do?
Seriously, though... it could be another bug in GSAK - traditionally, there are rather a lot of these which is one reason why I don't use it much.
However, testing the data in question (just now) seems to show that GSAK handles the "extra" waypoints just the way it always did - as extra waypoints.
In CSV format, there's no bum formatting or anything else I can see which would account for the oddly mixed-up waypoint names. And the position info (on your map, above) is correct.
I am baffled.
-Wlw |
|
Back to top |
|
|
dino Member
Joined: 07 Jan 2006 Posts: 68 Location: Killygordon, Co. Donegal
|
Posted: Sat Jan 21, 2006 10:03 am Post subject: |
|
|
Check out this thread in the UK Forum. That'll answer your questions _________________ No one is listening until you fart! |
|
Back to top |
|
|
dino Member
Joined: 07 Jan 2006 Posts: 68 Location: Killygordon, Co. Donegal
|
Posted: Sat Jan 21, 2006 10:07 am Post subject: |
|
|
Haggis Hunter wrote: | I don't understand how you have part of the waypoints as listed RYKC, as this is akin to my CITO event. It also won't allow you to have the same prefix, hence HA - HH, or the same lookup code, David Bellamy's World is listed from PARTA - PARTF and EAST.
Have you changed any of the codes, otherwise it looks as though it's all tits up, here is David Bellamy's World so that you can do a cross reference, as I am confused to the waymarks being named wrong? |
It's either a bug in Groundspeak with the new system or else a bug with GSAK as it's not yet set up to deal properly with the additional waypoints. I think it's the former and of course with it now being the weekend it'll stay broken until Monday evening
In the meantime I suggest loading the waypoints gpx into a seperate database or else not loading them at all until the problem goes away _________________ No one is listening until you fart! |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Haggis Hunter Founder member
Joined: 29 Aug 2005 Posts: 2487 Location: The building site formally known as Edinburgh!
|
Posted: Sat Jan 21, 2006 10:40 am Post subject: |
|
|
Wildlifewriter wrote: | Here's what the GPX file, directly from gc.com, should look like...
-Wlw |
I'm rather pleased that the last 4 digits/symbols came up as the GC waypoint, but do you know if this was done automatically, as it doesn't allow you to do this whilst making them, well it does for the first one, then not the rest. All those waypoints start with the correct HA - HF but should read PartA - PartF at the end, ie HAPARTA. (I know that is 7 letters but it allows for up to 8 in total).
It's looks to me as though Groundspeak change the waypoint code part to GC.com code, and leave the prefix code as you make it.
Does this all make sense? Difficult to explain! _________________ Let me know if I say anything that offends you
I might want to offend you again later |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Haggis Hunter Founder member
Joined: 29 Aug 2005 Posts: 2487 Location: The building site formally known as Edinburgh!
|
Posted: Sat Jan 21, 2006 10:49 am Post subject: |
|
|
I have just got my Edinburgh PQ through, all the additioanl waypoints when opened in GSAK finish with RYKC (That's the CITO event). It just so happens that the first waypoint is the actual CITO pubs waypoint, it looks as though GSAK is forcing the changes to that waypoint.
How did yours come up correct Wlw?
Here's what it looks like in GSAK, this is all the current additional WP's for Edinburgh.
_________________ Let me know if I say anything that offends you
I might want to offend you again later |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Billy Twigger Founder member
Joined: 30 Aug 2005 Posts: 352 Location: N55 51.686 W5 05.647
|
Posted: Sat Jan 21, 2006 11:11 am Post subject: |
|
|
Here's the script for mine:
SCRIPT
I haven't the foggiest idea what it all means, but these codes are in there. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Wildlifewriter Founder member
Joined: 04 Aug 2005 Posts: 948 Location: Norn Iron
|
Posted: Sat Jan 21, 2006 11:37 am Post subject: |
|
|
Haggis Hunter wrote: | It just so happens that the first waypoint is the actual CITO pubs waypoint, it looks as though GSAK is forcing the changes to that waypoint.
How did yours come up correct Wlw? |
Because I created the entries in GSAK from the GPX file downloaded from the cache page - not from a PQ file.
Now we're getting somewhere...
The problem is with the PQs - or how GSAK handles the PQs - because they're two different files. HH: Please e-mail me the original content of your PQ (both files), so that I can examine its data structure.
The data sample from BT above looks very strange. I'm doing a line-by-line check of it now.
-Wlw |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Wildlifewriter Founder member
Joined: 04 Aug 2005 Posts: 948 Location: Norn Iron
|
Posted: Sat Jan 21, 2006 11:40 am Post subject: |
|
|
dino wrote: | Check out this thread in the UK Forum. That'll answer your questions |
It looks like we are further on with this problem than they are.
-Wlw |
|
Back to top |
|
|
|