MartyFouts

Hitting goals is always cool, and I'm glad to see you hit this one. My current goal is to get the 50 closest caches. Every time I get within 1, somebody hides a bunch closer.

quote:Originally posted by Elias: quote:Originally posted by John, Mark & Kyle:I think Geocaching.com should just put the data out as XML. As mentioned in other posts, we're currently working on supporting the http://www.topografix.com/gpx.asp format which is just XML. This should provide you with the functionality and access to the data you and others have been asking for. Keep your eye out for the announcement of GPX support coming within a few weeks. -Elias If I understand correctly you're not going to use GPX, but rather start with GPX and change it into something proprietary to Groundspeak. My understanding comes from Jeremy's comment that you're not going to discuss your changes to GPX in the GPX developer's forum. This seems terribly short sighted to me. Is there any way at all to convince you to participate in the open standard process rather than developing a private format?

quote:Originally posted by Jeremy (Admin): quote:Originally posted by Marty Fouts: Do you have an idea when you'll be starting the discussion in the GPX mailing list on how to extend the format? I don't plan to discuss it in the mailing list. Jeremy Jeremy Irish Groundspeak - The Language of Location I don't understand. You said you were going to use GPX as your open non-proprietary format. If you don't propose your changes through the channel for updating GPX, all you're going to do is create a private proprietary variation of GPX. Why use GPX at all if you're not going to keep your format part of the open version?

good luck stabilizing the code.

Last week my "Closest" pocket query was running fine, so I switched it to run on Sundays only and then set up two additional queries. Here it is Tuesday, and I haven't gotten email for any of the three. Is there a problem with pocket query?

It's a tough call. Terrain/distance interact in interesting ways, topo maps get out of date, or aren't all that precise to begin with, and ratings are subjective. and, of course, a mistake by a cacher, like starting from the wrong parking lot, can turn an easy cache in to a 5. I'd say leave the subjective ratings alone and we who hide caches should try doing a better job of warning about severe problems.

It's bad luck to be superstitious

All of my locationless caches and three of my five non-locationless caches are fully handicap accessible. The fourth non-locationless may or may not be (it's too high above ground for wheel chair access but is otherwise accessible.) It is fairly straight-forward to do accessible urban caches, especially micro-caches and I try to take that into account while I'm scouting around for locations for urban caches.

quote:Originally posted by Mopar:As Jeremy has pointed out, he has always had the ability to see the IP address of the posters, making it easy for him to spot people with multiple accounts, but the rest of us don't have that luxury. I have used other web forums where the msg posters IP address is shown to other users. Often the last group of numbers is blanked, such as 138.89.74.xxx . This allows all users to see what ISP and POP location the msg is coming from, without providing enough info to direct DOS or hack attacks at the user. + _Illegitimus non carborundum!_ Stuff like this doesn't really help. First, a lot of people use the same IPs and then to access the same POPS (There are about 20 geocachers who use the same DSL ISP that I do, for instance.) So, between dhcp address allocation, nat, and the tendency of people to concentrate, it's not really all that easy to use an IP range to figure out who's who. Second, people who really want to give the appearnce of multiple identities should have no trouble at all finding multiple ISPs or other access points. A lot of people, for instance, have an account at work and another one at home. All such a person has to do is keep straight which one they're using for which avatar, and there's no obvious connection between the two. People like Eric who try hoaxes that they mean to be innocent hoaxes are easy to detect, but people who really want to cause trouble are usually people who know how to get acccess to multiple accounts. But you can't even tell from multiple accounts because a lot of people who have multiple connections tend to use them all, so if you assumed multiple IP ranges was bad, you'd tar a lot of innocent people that way.

I've tried MyPop for the first time on the thread about gluing magnets. There were 16 responses to the thread and I didn't get any email.

Of the caches I've hidden, the most popular are sign-only microcaches that are in 35mm film cannisters. I have a variety of ways of placing the cannisters, and one I like -- that I first encountered in a GeorgeandMary cache -- involves gluing magnets to the cannister and then putting the cannister along side something metal. (Another variant is to use those hide-a-key tins) My problem is that the magnets are not staying on. I've tried CA glues (superglue) and do sand the surfaces first, but after a while the flexibility of the can causes the magnet to pop loose. Anybody have a clue as to how to keep the magnets stuck? Will hot glue or epoxy work better? Thanks, Marty

The longest time? Well, there was the time we drove two days to get to Montana to find a cache near my home town. OK, we were going to Montana anyway, so that probably doesn't count. How about the day I drove 350 miles and hit 15 caches, involving a total of about 8 miles hiking in addition to the driving? That was an 18 hour day. Or maybe the all-day hike in Monte Bello open space preserve in order to hit two caches. That one was a seven mile hike with about 1000' of vertical. Any number of multicaches have involved many hours of driving/hiking combination. My favorite so far was the 10 mile bike ride on the Alviso Slough loop trail to pick up one of Pedalman's caches. The next cache I'm going after is only 6 miles from my house, but involves a four hour hike in Rancho San Antonio county park. But don't ask me, now. I've only been at this four months, and there are tons of easy caches in this area.

The longest time? Well, there was the time we drove two days to get to Montana to find a cache near my home town. OK, we were going to Montana anyway, so that probably doesn't count. How about the day I drove 350 miles and hit 15 caches, involving a total of about 8 miles hiking in addition to the driving? That was an 18 hour day. Or maybe the all-day hike in Monte Bello open space preserve in order to hit two caches. That one was a seven mile hike with about 1000' of vertical. Any number of multicaches have involved many hours of driving/hiking combination. My favorite so far was the 10 mile bike ride on the Alviso Slough loop trail to pick up one of Pedalman's caches. The next cache I'm going after is only 6 miles from my house, but involves a four hour hike in Rancho San Antonio county park. But don't ask me, now. I've only been at this four months, and there are tons of easy caches in this area.

I think it's fine for those who want to set up a competitive geocaching approach to do so, but I'd just as soon they don't use geocaching.com to do it. First, as a cache finder, I don't want to be rated, and I don't want to see ratings -- there's already a web site that does that for people who care. Second, as a cache hider, I don't want to get into issues with people about whether or not my cache ratings match their expectation of the rating system. I want feedback on that, and I'll adjust ratings if the feedback is convincing, but I don't want someone blathering on that my ratings are 'unfair' to some competition. Marty

quote:Originally posted by robertlipe: quote:Originally posted by Marty Fouts:Perhaps you can point me at a document on the Topographix web site that contains the non-objectionable license? Citing http://www.topografix.com/gpx_for_developers.asp GPX is an open standard. Anyone may use it, and there are no fees or licensing involved. Thank you. That takes care of my biggest concern about GPX. The second is that it's not suitable for geocaching. Does anyone know when geocaching.com will start a discussion on the GPX mailing list about extending GPX so it will be suitable for geocaching? I'm looking forward to such a discussion.

Locationless caches seem to me to be most like scavenger hunting with a gps, so I propose geoscavenging Marty

quote:Originally posted by Jeremy (Admin): Our next item to tackle is extending GPX (GPS data in XML format) to allow additional geocaching fields, so you can either create your own application that reads them or download one that (I'm sure) many developers who play are chomping at the bit to create (like yourself?). Jeremy Irish Groundspeak - The Language of Location Do you have an idea when you'll be starting the discussion in the GPX mailing list on how to extend the format?

quote:Originally posted by Jeremy (Admin): quote:Originally posted by Marty Fouts:Looks like a great start. You mentioned 'sorting out open ebook'. This makes me think that you might be creating open ebook format files and then converting them to mobi's format. If so, would it be possible to make open ebook format an output option? The short answer is no. What you really want would be better handled by an XML format like GPX. Our next item to tackle is extending GPX (GPS data in XML format) to allow additional geocaching fields, so you can either create your own application that reads them or download one that (I'm sure) many developers who play are chomping at the bit to create (like yourself?). Anyway, hacking Mobipocket would be a bunch of wasted effort. What you would like is an open format for Geocaching pages. That will become available once we sort out how to generate the files and a set standard for distributing them. Jeremy Irish Groundspeak - The Language of Location Three points: 1) I don't want to hack Mobipocket. I want to hack an open format. 2) Open Ebook is an open format. 3) Would someone please point me at the legal document on Topographics web site that contains the license for GPX. As far as I can tell it is a proprietary format and doesn't have an acceptable license.

quote:Originally posted by robertlipe: quote:Originally posted by Marty Fouts:GPX is another proprietary format, but at least it's XML based. It also doesn't have all of the information one would want for a cache record. GPX is *not* proprietary. The spec is public. Participation in the spec process is free. Yes, Topografix was a major motivator in it, but it's supported by a growing number of programs. And while GPX itself doesn't mandate tags that would be specific to geocaching (of course) it does define the way to extend the spec in a portable and open way that's consistent with XML DTD stuff. There are existence proofs of such extensions discussed in the GPX developers lists. Working with the data in GPX would be much more pleasant than the encrypted (grrr) mobi format. Maybe even if the "unadulterated" ebook format would be enough if the rest of the cache information was there. quote:It is highly desirable that the data format be open, well documented, and available under a non-objectionable license GPX accomplishes all these points. See http://www.topografix.com/gpx.asp GPX is owned by topografix. It is not available under a non-objectionable license. It is not intended for geocaching. It is possible that all three of these things could change. I've been on the forum for a while and seen no discussion on any of the three, nor started no discussion. Perhaps you can point me at a document on the Topographix web site that contains the non-objectionable license?

quote:Originally posted by Elias:The scope of this project was to provide an eBook for Palms and Pocket PCs. Our evaluation of available eBook formats and software led us to Mobipocket for their combination of a free multiplatform reader application, and a well designed backend tool we could use to create these books easily. Another goal was to make this easy and user-friendly for the vast majority of Geocachers. I think the Mobipocket setup we've created does this, and will serve the community well. I understand that for more techie users that this isn't considered an ideal solution. But we needed a format and software that we could support for our diverse and large scale audience. Version 2 of the Pocket Query tool will include an option to get the results retuned in GPX format and should be sufficient for what some of you are wanting to do. But just keep in mind that the vast majority of Geocachers wouldn't know what to do with GPX, so it made more sense for us to concentrate on the eBook format first. -Elias GPX is another proprietary format, but at least it's XML based. It also doesn't have all of the information one would want for a cache record. I think what you've done with mobi is a very good start, but I strongly suggest that the next step be a much more open format and one worked out with the direct input of those people in the user community who care about such things. It is highly desirable that the data format be open, well documented, and available under a non-objectionable license like the GPL (notice I said data *format* -- license for the actual data is a different issue.) It seems to me that thinking of GPX as an option is a good first step, but GPX is a Topographix proprietary format and isn't complete. A better solution would be to write an open standard for cache data interchange as an XML dtd and license it under the GPL. Then it would be easy to write a converter from that to open ebook (which is what mobi reads to produce their closed ebook format)

Looks like a great start. You mentioned 'sorting out open ebook'. This makes me think that you might be creating open ebook format files and then converting them to mobi's format. If so, would it be possible to make open ebook format an output option? Here's why: I'm odd, in that I don't like to bother the web site when I'm exploring an area. What I do now is download the .loc entries for all the caches in the area that I'm headed to and convert the waypoints so that my road-map software can read it. On the road-map software, i can click on a cache location and have it go to the web page for that cache. That's cool, but it means I have to be on line. So, what I'd like to do, is get the result from my query and massage the .loc files so that instead of the URL for the web page they have an index to the cache site in the ebook file so that clicking on them would cause the ebook reader to go to the right page. I'll write the software to do that, but in order to be able to, I need the ebook in a format that I can process. So, to make a long story short, I either need to know how to read Mobi's format (anybody have a reference document?) or I need the ebook in a format I can read. Another benefit of this is that I can run a 'get all' query once, put the db on my laptop, and then filter what I put on the PDA so that I only take info for the day with with me. To do this otherwise I have to plan out everything two days in advance, set up the query and hope I didn't screw it up. Anyway, long story short: can someone point me at documentation on the mobi format, or can you make the open book version of the ebook available as an output option? Thanks

Why not make it two separate caches, one for the 'easy' virtual cache and the other for the puzzle? You can change the text of the virtual cache to indicate a pointer to the puzzle cache and have the puzzle cache point back to the virtual cache.

in some cases my wife waits on the trail while i do the bushwhacking. occassionally i'll take the FRS with us for those cases, but they don't come up very often.

two of my three microcaches are fully wheel chair accessable. The third would be, except that the cache is too high to reach from a wheel chair. I'm trying to make all of my urban caches that way. Marty

I hide microcaches near historical markers for precisely the reason you suggest, but some markers are in locations where there simply are no good places to put caches nearby, not even microcaches -- which is why my first cache is a virtual multicache. And while you can 'see' hundreds of historical markers going down 101, you don't really get to experience them that way. As I've already mentioned in this thread, one of my favorite logs on my virtual cache is from a guy who road his bike past the first sign every day but had never noticed it. Tastes vary, and you don't like the part of geocaching that involves the finder being the one to locate the object rather than the placer. That's OK, but just because it doesn't appeal to you doesn't mean it's not a good part of the hobby -- it definitely appeals to others. I have three locationless caches, one virtual cache, three microcaches, and one regular cache -- and that's the order they get visited in, from most often to least. While the most noise in the forums seems to be against locationless and virtual caches, the most traffic seems to be to them, so they're pretty popular with the people finding caches, even if they're not popular with the people talking about them. quote:Originally posted by White Rabbit: That whole deal with the "historical marker" locationless cache is kind of what I'm talking about. That just doesn't seem to be Geocaching in my opinion. I can drive down Highway 101 and see dozens of those Historical markers, but that doesn't have to do with caching. Why not make it like the series of caches done by, ummm...Fractal I think, called the "Oregon History Lessons". He took the time to go and find somewhere near these History Markers to hide a cache, and after we found that, we went ahead and read about the place. I'm not telling anyone how to place thier caches or what they should like or not like, for the THIRD time, I was just curious to see if anyone else liked to just hunt for the caches with an actual container of some sorts at the end. There's no need to get all defensive or anything. http://www.iinet.net.au/~rabbit/rabpics/buneatg.gif _I am the Rabbit King, I can do anything_