Tracklog handling

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
5 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Tracklog handling

GPS Dr
The new Magellan Explorists (400,500,600) support 5 tracklogs.  Does this mean that
GPS-babel won't support those units?  Once customers find out you can't swap out
common batteries in the field, they pass on them.  They might be great for day-trippers
or geocachers, but most people that may stay out for days don't want to carry
around a battery pack with USB cable to recharge, or an expensive pack.
 
I have some issues with Lowrance compatibility (iFinder series).  Not many free
packages support their USR format.  GPStrackmaker can write the tracklogs,
but if you send more than one at a time, it concatenates them all.  Lowrance's idea of
importing track information is to cut & paste a list of coordinates.  When you try
to rename a tracklog, their TOPOcreate 6.3 crashes.
On the plus side for Lowrance, it is the only one of the top 3 that lets you know the
name of a tracklog if you position the cursor over it.  You can also tweak the track
log display on a per track basis,
  Lowrance website claimed they made their formats available to 3rd party developers,
but haven't been able to get it from them.  Any body have that format?  Last I
looked, I believe that GPSbabel only handled waypoints for that format.
 
  I have 35 Denver bike tracklogs, and it's nice to be able to fit them all on the
GPS at the same time.  Since I limit the tracklogs to no more than 250 points,
Common Garmin limit for saved logs,  Can do decent tracks for most bike
trails up to 20 miles, Have one that's 33.4 miles, but it follows a Beltway highway
with long straight sections.
I can hold at least 40 in the 10K allotment.  I have room to create a new log
with the 35 loaded (a few K pts max)left for new track &  I could save them to card if needed)
 
Thanks,
Bob
Add FUN to your email - CLICK HERE!
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Tracklog handling

Robert Lipe
GPS Dr wrote:

>    The new Magellan Explorists (400,500,600) support 5 tracklogs.
>    Does this mean that GPS-babel won't support those units?  Once

I've seen that in the specs, but the track files I've studied (from
admittedly a prerelease unit) are utterly indistinguishable from those
of Meridian which doesn't have a concept of multiple tracks.

If you have an Explorist file that clearly shows multiple tracks, I'd
like to study it.

>    customers find out you can't swap out common batteries in the
>    field, they pass on them.  They might be great for day-trippers or

I'm not sure I want to get into this on this list.  There's plenty
of discussion on this topic in the 'units & software' section on the
Groundspeak forums and at Gpspassion.


>    Last I looked, I believe that GPSbabel only handled waypoints for
>    [lowrance .usr]

That's correct.  Nobody with access to the units has contributed support
for tracks and routes.  The user base hasn't funded anyone else to do it
and Lowrance ignored my request for developer kits.  There's not likely
to be any required rocket science; it just needs someone motivated to
tackle it.

Are you likely to be that someone?

--
Support GPSBabel by helping to improve it or fund those that that have
done so.  Visit:

        http://sourceforge.net/donate/index.php?group_id=58972


-------------------------------------------------------
SF.Net email is sponsored by: Discover Easy Linux Migration Strategies
from IBM. Find simple to follow Roadmaps, straightforward articles,
informative Webcasts and more! Get everything you need to get up to
speed, fast. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=7477&alloc_id=16492&op=click
_______________________________________________
Gpsbabel-code mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gpsbabel-code
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Tracklog handling

rnlnero
> Robert Lipe wrote:

>> GPS Dr wrote:
>>
>>    Last I looked, I believe that GPSbabel only handled waypoints for
>>>    [lowrance .usr]
>>
>> That's correct.  Nobody with access to the units has contributed support
>> for tracks and routes.  The user base hasn't funded anyone else to do it
>> and Lowrance ignored my request for developer kits.  There's not likely
>> to be any required rocket science; it just needs someone motivated to
>> tackle it.
>
> Are you likely to be that someone?

Funny this came up...I just joined the list yesterday and in fact am looking
into extending lowranceusr.c to support tracks first, then maybe routes later.
I should be able to code something soon and test.  Who do I talk to when I get
something working?

Ling
--



-------------------------------------------------------
SF.Net email is sponsored by: Discover Easy Linux Migration Strategies
from IBM. Find simple to follow Roadmaps, straightforward articles,
informative Webcasts and more! Get everything you need to get up to
speed, fast. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=7477&alloc_id=16492&op=click
_______________________________________________
Gpsbabel-code mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gpsbabel-code
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Tracklog handling

Robert Lipe
Russ & Ling wrote:

> Funny this came up...I just joined the list yesterday and in fact am
> looking into extending lowranceusr.c to support tracks first, then
> maybe routes later.  I should be able to code something soon and test.

Lovely.   Let us know if you have questions.  

> Who do I talk to when I get something working?

Patches to this list are entirely appropriate.

If you can include test cases in testo (including sample files) to
help exercise it, that's even better.

Thanx,
RJL


--
Support GPSBabel by helping to improve it or fund those that that have
done so.  Visit:

        http://sourceforge.net/donate/index.php?group_id=58972


-------------------------------------------------------
SF.Net email is sponsored by: Discover Easy Linux Migration Strategies
from IBM. Find simple to follow Roadmaps, straightforward articles,
informative Webcasts and more! Get everything you need to get up to
speed, fast. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=7477&alloc_id=16492&op=click
_______________________________________________
Gpsbabel-code mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gpsbabel-code
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Lowrance design decisions

rnlnero
I'm modifying lowranceusr.c to add support to routes and tracks.  I'm not sure
how to treat Lowrance's event icons.

The event icons are markers that you can drop on the map (usually the current
location) quickly.  They have lat/long associated with them but they are not
waypoints -- no date/time stamp, altitude, name, can't find or goto (except by
goto cursor), etc.  Right now I discard them in the data stream.  But perhaps I
should instead convert them into waypoints with the same icon?  My thinking is,
it might be a quick way to drop a graphical marker on the map and have them
converted into navigable waypoints for later use.  Or would this be
over-thinking for the user -- e.g. "if I wanted a waypoint with this icon, I'd
have made a waypoint with this icon!"

Thoughts?

Ling
--



-------------------------------------------------------
SF.Net email is sponsored by: Discover Easy Linux Migration Strategies
from IBM. Find simple to follow Roadmaps, straightforward articles,
informative Webcasts and more! Get everything you need to get up to
speed, fast. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=7477&alloc_id=16492&op=click
_______________________________________________
Gpsbabel-code mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gpsbabel-code