eremmel65

There is an other way to get more waymarks into GSAK via Google Earth (150 a time, see . But this also does not help you with the visit instructions. When I was reading your post I was thinking: Visit intructions are per category. So we might identify one WM per category as containing the visit template and copy it to each loaded WM of that category. I might add this to WaymarkPostProcessLoadGpx.gsk. What about putting the visit instructions into the 'hints' section?

I ran into the same cumbersome procedure: manual editing WMs in GSAK. I made a macro WaymarkPostProcessLoadGpx.gsk (Fix loaded waymarks and mark WM as Found or Posted), to make life easier; hope yours as well.

I got an other source. And the interesting thing is that you can inspect sources an compiler output. So might start reconstructing the website ;-). This kind of info should never go outside, so it looks they are working hard to fix and are getting desperate, so loosing attention to keep safety procedures in place...

But what about WM-details, group-details, searches, list all groups? I see my own stats, any other member page but nothing of the 'details'.

I doubt the explanation because I used my work VPN to connect to the US. 'tracert www.Waymarking.com' shows only one hop: 1 166 ms 164 ms 166 ms www.Waymarking.com [63.251.163.208] So this has nothing to do with ISPs etc. Also when I use tool like HTTPWatch I see just a 302 (forwarding) to a page that shows error 500: object moved. So the web site is broken and/or partial down.

I think the build in cameras of GPSrs are not good enough. I use a Cannon Powershot XS 260 for my photo's. But I've not always the patients to wait for GPS stability (esp when not much sky is visible). So most time I use my tracks from GPSr and tag my photos via exiftool and ExifToolGUI. Then I upload the tracks and photos in BaseCamp. I use this a basis for posting Waymarks. I noticed that it is important to have the time of GPSr and camera equal, 'cause that is the common factor. Fortunate tools like exiftool can adjust the timing at second level to bring both in sync. I start my trip most of time with a reference photo with some traveling speed.

I like the Google Earth view via WM as well, you can find 150 WM at a time. I'm using GSAK to store WM before I upload them to my GPSr. The cumbersome loading of a few WM via GPX made me think, is it not possible to save those WM views from Google and load them into GSAK. This resulted in two GSAK macro's. One to load KMZ / KML files into GSAK and one to post process this loading (and of GPX loading) and mark those as just-loaded, found or posted. I can now keep track on my posted, found and not-found WMs via GSAK. Unfortunate you have no information about your found/posted WMs via Google Earth (GE). However, you can start with all your posted WM via your Profile page 'Waymark List'. Mark them as Posted. Then you have to load all your found WMs via GPX load unfortunate. When these two steps are finished you can add WMs via GE in sets of 150. Note that you keep the import option on not to change any already loaded WM (or Waymarks as called in GSAK). The two macros can be found here WaymarkImportKMZ and WaymarkPostProcessLoadGpx.

On trips I just make each day a post with only category and wm name, save it. When home again I fill wn details and file the wm.

I use GSAK to keep track of (un)found/posted waymarks and use GSAK to upload them to my Oregon 450. The handling of waymarks is somewhat cumbersome in GSAK. Use the very good macro GarminExport with custom attributes to get the right icons on my Garmin. Started a few months back to write two macros to make my life easier. The are now available for others as well: WaymarkPostProcessLoadGpx: Mark Waymarks as Found/Posted and correct some data when loading non-'GPX lite file' imports from Waymarking.com WaymarkImportKmz: Import saved KMZ files from Google Earth into GSAK (works in combination with previous macro). Have fun, Erik

Modern devices are getting better and better suited for paperless geocaching. Unfortunate not all geocache descriptions are well designed for paperless geocaching and as far as I understand there is a limitation of the images that is allowed to be retrieved from geocaching.com (API). This issue is important with multi-caches that have pictures to find during the track in the description, but not in the special area (I noticed that this area is also used for spoiler pictures). This brings me to two remarks/question: 1 is there a rule for the reviewers of new submitted geocaches that make sure that the supplied information is good enough to support paperless geocaching as well. 2 is the rule that 'only a certain set of pictures can be downloaded from geocaching' by tools like GSAK not too strict in relation to historical situation that not all geocache descriptions are 'paperless' ready. As an example one might have a look to http://coord.info/GCTY0J: The first set of 16 pictures are mentioned in the 'spoiler' section, but lack the number for the puzzle in the description The second group of pictures to complete the route to the cache are not listed at all.