the Seagnoid

EXCELLENT!!! Groundspeak has not been great at keeping owners advised of the status of caches that need work, this does the job brilliantly. My only suggestion is to reduce the amount of space taken up be the cache listing in the main view on a PC browser. Ie reduce all the white space between lines. On a phone is fine.

I like the idea if a sock puppet account - A Needs Maintenance Autobot that uses advanced AI (ie, me) to intelligently read Found logs to detect for maintence needed on my caches that are difficult to get to . The easy ones, of course get maintenance immediately, but as numerous others above state, needing maintenance does not necessarily mean the logbook is affected in such a way that the cache needs to be disabled.

Yes. What is the point of a Needs Maintenance log except to alert the CO that they need to plan a maintenance trip? Going out on the day is not always feasible, especially where the caches require significant effort to reach. Given that, why can I not have a single list of ALL my caches that need maintenance?

It is far easier to sort the problem myself, than to try to retrain the entire geocaching community! (or at least, all the ones that need training)

@LOne.R - perhaps you should read the original post. Your suggested methods to not pull the complete list of caches needed maintenance.

When the ability to log a find on your own caches was removed (and quite rightly, too) the ability to log a Needs Maintenance on your own cache was also removed. However many people who log a find and state that there is a problem that needs fixing, state that in their find log and do not log a Needs Maintenance. As a result Cache owners have to maintain a manual list in addition to the one that Groundspeak so nicely provides. The Groundspeak list can be accessed via a scheduled pocket query, or through Project GC's Needs Maintenance query. But the manual entries the cache owner needs to keep (or more likely, tries to remember) - is not so nicely stored, and certainly not in the same consolidated place. Could we please have just one list of all caches we have that need maintenance to help us manage our maintenance trips? Could cache owners please be able to log a needs maintenance on their own caches. This would help make managing maintenance easier, and so make cache maintenance more likely to happen, increasing the enjoyment for cache finders.

Benchmarks start with what two letters? It's probably not "BM"

I am working on a new puzzle geocache, and I am after the code identifiers that geocaching uses. These can be used to construct a URL directly to a particular item (eg by using https://coord.info/xxxxxxx). Another clue is that these are the codes that tracking IDs may not start with (you will never see a tracking id that starts with GC) For example: GC - GeoCache - a geocache description GL - Geocache log - an individual geocache log TB - Travel Bug - a trackable's description TL - Trackable Log - an individual log of a trackable retrieve, visit, etc. PR - Profile - a player profile (mine is PR5DMHT) BM - BookMark - an individual list GT - GeoTour There are also common travelbug tracking codes, such as OC - Oak Coins - I do not need these. Are there any others? Do drafts have one?

Friend request sent...

Title says it all. I get an error. Others get the same error so it is not just me.

Hey! The final waypoint came back! All fixed now, many thanks all.

Alas... not an easy fix as I cannot put the final waypoint back in. With the final waypoint gone the solution checker box is gone too.

I deleted my final waypoint as that is not relevant in a challenge either. Can't get it back. Guess I just have to delete and start again. At least I can copy-and-paste the main text back in. And cannot add a final waypoint back in either.

Changing to Traditional and back does not remove the solution checker. Grrr.

Clicking the numbered list button produces a bulleted list. Clicking the bulleted list button produces a numbered list. Heading4 is not implemented at all.

The rule against burying the cache is to avoid cachers getting out with a spade and digging holes all over the place. If it does not require the finder to remove soil to find the cache, then the cache is not buried (even if it is located below ground level)

I have created a challenge cache, which of course does not need a solution checker. I inadvertently left the solution checker option ticked, but now, when I edit the page, I cannot find an option to remove it. Where is the tick box? Or do I have to do something crazy like change my cache to a traditional and back to a puzzle?

False alert: the trackable totals part of the API *is* working. Still no trackables in the box though

Project-gc are unable to do stats on number of tracables collected. I suspect the API is missing the procedure that allows PGC to collect total traceable finds.

Not that I care that much about trackable stats. Of the two I prefer trackable info restored to GPX files being the higher priority.

The missing procedure has nothing to do with drop/retrieve/discover. Details in the thread above.

Good answer. Badly explains dropping trackable stats, but not taking trackables out of the GPX. Does not explain why there was no announcement stating this.

The API (Application programming interface) is a set of queries that other applications, such as the Geocaching App, Cachly, Project-GC use to collect (or send) data. Eg to collect local caches about a set of coordinates, or to upload a find log. One of the procedures available was used by Progect-GC to collect number of trackables found by a geocacher (the missing procedure does not affect logging trackable finds, it affects the statistics Project-GC (and possibly others) use. Most likely it will also break the checker used by some older challenge based on trackable finds. Yes! Exactly!! Why would they do that? I don't get it.

Trackables are great. We all love them. And yet: Groundspeak have removed resident trackables from the GPX files (some time ago) Groundspeak have not included trackable discoveries in the new API. So my conclusion is - it's a conspiracy theory to slowly reduce interest in trackables so as to eventually drop support for them completely. I used both features. Can we have them back please? ADDENDUM: False alert - the trackable totals in the API *is* working. Trackables are still missing from the API.

Trackable discoveries has been removed from the new API. Please put it back in! (oh - and while I am talking about reduced support for trackables) - can we have resident trackables reinserted back into the GPX download file too. thanks ADDENDUM: trackable totals of the API *is* working. However trackables are still missing from the GPX.