The 7-digit waypoint codes

[+Crystal Sound]

This message is more a rant / complaint, than a help request. Maybe someone shares my thoughts on this.

 

I am very disapointed in the "new" waypoint names moving to a 7-digit code. My GPSr only accepts 6-digit waypoint codes.

 

When I upload my waypoint files, my GPS drops the last digit of the waypoint code. So far, this has not posed much of a problem.

 

I see two conditions that could cause issues:

1. The truncation of the last digit could create a waypoint that has the same name as an existing, and thus being overwritten in the GPSr.

2. A hider hides several caches at nearly the same time (which has happened in my area), creating waypoints that are different by only the last digit. Thus, when I go to load them into my unit, only the last waypoint will remain in my unit, as the previous ones will have been overwritten.

 

Of course, the simple solution is to edit every offending waypoint name, on every new PQ that I want to load into my GPSr. Difficult, no. Frustrating, yes.

 

Is there any particular reason why the site went to a 7-digit code, rather than advancing from "GCxxxx" to Gxxxxx" ? It would seem to me that would be a better solution, than going to the 7 digit format now used. I know that I am not the only person who now is faced with this issue.

Edited January 2, 2007 by Crystal Sound

[+pppingme]

This message is more a rant / complaint, than a help request. Maybe someone shares my thoughts on this.

 

I am very disapointed in the "new" waypoint names moving to a 7-digit code. My GPSr only accepts 6-digit waypoint codes.

 

When I upload my waypoint files, my GPS drops the last digit of the waypoint code. So far, this has not posed much of a problem.

 

I see two conditions that could cause issues:

1. The truncation of the last digit could create a waypoint that has the same name as an existing, and thus being overwritten in the GPSr.

2. A hider hides several caches at nearly the same time (which has happened in my area), creating waypoints that are different by only the last digit. Thus, when I go to load them into my unit, only the last waypoint will remain in my unit, as the previous ones will have been overwritten.

 

Of course, the simple solution is to edit every offending waypoint name, on every new PQ that I want to load into my GPSr. Difficult, no. Frustrating, yes.

 

Is there any particular reason why the site went to a 7-digit code, rather than advancing from "GCxxxx" to Gxxxxx" ? It would seem to me, that would be a better solution, than going to the 7 digit format now used. I know that I am not the only person who now is faced with this issue.

I for one SUPPORT keeping the "GC" for a variety of reasons.

 

Rather than argue those reasons, may I suggest that you use a "waypoint management" program, such as GSAK.

 

With gsak, you can instruct it to change the GC to just a G, or even drop it all together.

 

Even sweeter is what GSAK calls "smart names". Basicly the default smart name will try to be an abbreviation of the cache name. Even sweeter if you don't like the smart name, you can over-ride it.

 

My GPS holds 10, but for other reasons I limit it to 8 characters and the smart-name is a VERY VERY nice name to have. Your never going to remember what GCXXXX is, but you will probably remember "OVERWATE", short for Over Water, or for your case "OVERWA"... Still way friendlier than GCXXXX.

[+webscouter.]

GPSBabel and GPXSpinner will both allow you to upload the names without the GC in front of it transparently. I use GPSBabel to upload all my GPX files.

[+The Last Airbender]

GPSBabel and GPXSpinner will both allow you to upload the names without the GC in front of it transparently. I use GPSBabel to upload all my GPX files.

 

GSAK can do this as well using special tags during upload

[+Crystal Sound]

This message is more a rant / complaint, than a help request. Maybe someone shares my thoughts on this.

 

I am very disapointed in the "new" waypoint names moving to a 7-digit code. My GPSr only accepts 6-digit waypoint codes.

 

When I upload my waypoint files, my GPS drops the last digit of the waypoint code. So far, this has not posed much of a problem.

 

I see two conditions that could cause issues:

1. The truncation of the last digit could create a waypoint that has the same name as an existing, and thus being overwritten in the GPSr.

2. A hider hides several caches at nearly the same time (which has happened in my area), creating waypoints that are different by only the last digit. Thus, when I go to load them into my unit, only the last waypoint will remain in my unit, as the previous ones will have been overwritten.

 

Of course, the simple solution is to edit every offending waypoint name, on every new PQ that I want to load into my GPSr. Difficult, no. Frustrating, yes.

 

Is there any particular reason why the site went to a 7-digit code, rather than advancing from "GCxxxx" to Gxxxxx" ? It would seem to me, that would be a better solution, than going to the 7 digit format now used. I know that I am not the only person who now is faced with this issue.

I for one SUPPORT keeping the "GC" for a variety of reasons.

 

Rather than argue those reasons, may I suggest that you use a "waypoint management" program, such as GSAK.

 

With gsak, you can instruct it to change the GC to just a G, or even drop it all together.

 

Even sweeter is what GSAK calls "smart names". Basicly the default smart name will try to be an abbreviation of the cache name. Even sweeter if you don't like the smart name, you can over-ride it.

 

My GPS holds 10, but for other reasons I limit it to 8 characters and the smart-name is a VERY VERY nice name to have. Your never going to remember what GCXXXX is, but you will probably remember "OVERWATE", short for Over Water, or for your case "OVERWA"... Still way friendlier than GCXXXX.

 

Thanks for the suggestion. GSAK is nice, except I have one additional problem - I dont use a PC, and someone has yet to develop as good of a program for Mac or Linux.

 

Having waypoint names that resemble the cache name is nice, if that is the only thing you have loaded in your GPS. Unfortunately, with the many activities I participate in and the many different things i use a GPS for besides geocaching, keeping names straight gets to be difficult.

 

I found it was just easier to look up the last 4 (or now 5) digits, since they all begin with GC anyways.

[+Crystal Sound]

GPSBabel and GPXSpinner will both allow you to upload the names without the GC in front of it transparently. I use GPSBabel to upload all my GPX files.

 

Thanks for the suggestion.

 

I'll have to look again at GPSBabel. Its been about 2 years since I gave it a spin. I've been using a few other programs since then.

[+pppingme]

Thanks for the suggestion. GSAK is nice, except I have one additional problem - I dont use a PC, and someone has yet to develop as good of a program for Mac or Linux.

 

Having waypoint names that resemble the cache name is nice, if that is the only thing you have loaded in your GPS. Unfortunately, with the many activities I participate in and the many different things i use a GPS for besides geocaching, keeping names straight gets to be difficult.

 

I found it was just easier to look up the last 4 (or now 5) digits, since they all begin with GC anyways.

There has been a lot of talk on the gsak board about running gsak under wine... I have no idea if there is a "mac" port of wine though, but being semi bsd based I would think something is out there...

 

I also "manage" a handful of waypoints that are not GC related, and I keep them all in gsak. Earlier I mentioned my gps has 10 chars but I only use 8, its one of the uses of the two extra characters that I use (well I should say lack of certain characters means its a cache to me).

[+webscouter.]

This message is more a rant / complaint, than a help request. Maybe someone shares my thoughts on this.

 

I am very disapointed in the "new" waypoint names moving to a 7-digit code. My GPSr only accepts 6-digit waypoint codes.

 

When I upload my waypoint files, my GPS drops the last digit of the waypoint code. So far, this has not posed much of a problem.

 

I see two conditions that could cause issues:

1. The truncation of the last digit could create a waypoint that has the same name as an existing, and thus being overwritten in the GPSr.

2. A hider hides several caches at nearly the same time (which has happened in my area), creating waypoints that are different by only the last digit. Thus, when I go to load them into my unit, only the last waypoint will remain in my unit, as the previous ones will have been overwritten.

 

Of course, the simple solution is to edit every offending waypoint name, on every new PQ that I want to load into my GPSr. Difficult, no. Frustrating, yes.

 

Is there any particular reason why the site went to a 7-digit code, rather than advancing from "GCxxxx" to Gxxxxx" ? It would seem to me, that would be a better solution, than going to the 7 digit format now used. I know that I am not the only person who now is faced with this issue.

I for one SUPPORT keeping the "GC" for a variety of reasons.

 

Rather than argue those reasons, may I suggest that you use a "waypoint management" program, such as GSAK.

 

With gsak, you can instruct it to change the GC to just a G, or even drop it all together.

 

Even sweeter is what GSAK calls "smart names". Basicly the default smart name will try to be an abbreviation of the cache name. Even sweeter if you don't like the smart name, you can over-ride it.

 

My GPS holds 10, but for other reasons I limit it to 8 characters and the smart-name is a VERY VERY nice name to have. Your never going to remember what GCXXXX is, but you will probably remember "OVERWATE", short for Over Water, or for your case "OVERWA"... Still way friendlier than GCXXXX.

 

Thanks for the suggestion. GSAK is nice, except I have one additional problem - I dont use a PC, and someone has yet to develop as good of a program for Mac or Linux.

 

Having waypoint names that resemble the cache name is nice, if that is the only thing you have loaded in your GPS. Unfortunately, with the many activities I participate in and the many different things i use a GPS for besides geocaching, keeping names straight gets to be difficult.

 

I found it was just easier to look up the last 4 (or now 5) digits, since they all begin with GC anyways.

 

GPSBabel has a very nice Mac interface now.

[+Yamar]

Thanks for the suggestion. GSAK is nice, except I have one additional problem - I dont use a PC, and someone has yet to develop as good of a program for Mac or Linux.

 

FYI, geoqo is a very new program that works on macs, linux, other unixes, etc. (oh, and windows of course).

 

http://geoqo.sourceforge.net/

 

It's extremely fast and does a large number of things that other caching software doesn't do (including cache density plots; see the screenshots web page).

 

It is new, however, and thus there isn't much nice pretty graphic support yet. But it's free (please help out if you want to pay back for it ;-) it is an open-source project so anyone can contribute to it)

[danoshimano]

Here's another problem with the 7-digit codes:

 

When you place a cache, the system still limits you to 6-digit codes for additional waypoints. Therefore, it is difficult to make meaningful child waypoints, as you only have ONE digit to play with.

 

Example: If the cache code is GC1234 the best code for a parking spot would be PK1234. Or, if there are multiple parking areas then P11234 P21234, etc.

 

This no longer works. If the system is being updated to use 7-digit codes, then the WHOLE system should be updated at the same time, not just a piece of it.

[+1NatureMom]

I cannot access 7 digits on my razor phone when I wap.geocaching.com.

 

Is the wap/phones going to be accommodate 7 digits soon?

 

Thx!

[+Prime Suspect]

Here's another problem with the 7-digit codes:

 

When you place a cache, the system still limits you to 6-digit codes for additional waypoints. Therefore, it is difficult to make meaningful child waypoints, as you only have ONE digit to play with.

 

Example: If the cache code is GC1234 the best code for a parking spot would be PK1234. Or, if there are multiple parking areas then P11234 P21234, etc.

 

This no longer works. If the system is being updated to use 7-digit codes, then the WHOLE system should be updated at the same time, not just a piece of it.

Since people can type in pretty much anything they want, there's no consistent naming scheme in place. Creating waypoint names for additional waypoints is something better done by your GPX file utility.

[danoshimano]

Since people can type in pretty much anything they want, there's no consistent naming scheme in place. Creating waypoint names for additional waypoints is something better done by your GPX file utility.

 

The concept was simple: just make the last four characters the same as the waypoint code. Replace the GC with what ever you want. Lots of caches in my area followed this convention and it makes it easy to associate the extra waypoints with the cache.

 

It's a small thing, and small things are often overlooked. (Like the WAP that was also mentioned.)

[+fizzymagic]

The concept was simple: just make the last four characters the same as the waypoint code. Replace the GC with what ever you want. Lots of caches in my area followed this convention and it makes it easy to associate the extra waypoints with the cache.

I believe you are mistaken, and that there is in fact no problem.

 

The whole "enter the waypoint name" thing isn't really functional anyway; I can't for the life of me figure out what it is for. When you do a PQ with waypoints in it, the waypoints are named using the 2-character prefix and the 5-character base-31 cache ID. We lobbied hard to set it up that way so that the waypoints can be automatically associated with the appropriate geocache.

 

I just entered a waypoint on one of my caches, ran a PQ that included it, and verified that the resulting waypoint name is exactly as I described above. The 6-character thing I entered does not contribute to the waypoint name in the PQ.

 

So I really don't think there is a problem.

[danoshimano]

The concept was simple: just make the last four characters the same as the waypoint code. Replace the GC with what ever you want. Lots of caches in my area followed this convention and it makes it easy to associate the extra waypoints with the cache.

I believe you are mistaken, and that there is in fact no problem.

 

The whole "enter the waypoint name" thing isn't really functional anyway; I can't for the life of me figure out what it is for. When you do a PQ with waypoints in it, the waypoints are named using the 2-character prefix and the 5-character base-31 cache ID. We lobbied hard to set it up that way so that the waypoints can be automatically associated with the appropriate geocache.

 

I just entered a waypoint on one of my caches, ran a PQ that included it, and verified that the resulting waypoint name is exactly as I described above. The 6-character thing I entered does not contribute to the waypoint name in the PQ.

 

So I really don't think there is a problem.

 

That would explain why all the caches I load in my area follow the same convention! However, your test would need to be performed on a new 7-digit cache ID as well to determine if gc.com actually updated that part of the system.

[+fizzymagic]

That would explain why all the caches I load in my area follow the same convention! However, your test would need to be performed on a new 7-digit cache ID as well to determine if gc.com actually updated that part of the system.

Of course. Which is why the test I did was on a new 7-digit ID cache. I guess I forgot to mention that part. Anyway, it worked just fine.

Edited January 6, 2007 by fizzymagic

[CoyoteRed]

This message is more a rant / complaint, than a help request. Maybe someone shares my thoughts on this.

 

I am very disapointed in the "new" waypoint names moving to a 7-digit code. My GPSr only accepts 6-digit waypoint codes.

 

...

 

I know that I am not the only person who now is faced with this issue.

 

I use GSAK and because I import cache data from sources other than Groundspeak I, too, needed a system that wouldn't get confused with similar waypoints.

 

I now use a script within GSAK to rename the waypoints. Even with over 8,000 caches in the database I still only need 3 digits to have a unique code.

 

PM me if you're interested in this solution. (So, I won't get hammered for a commercial post.)

[CoyoteRed]

[double post]

Edited January 6, 2007 by CoyoteRed

[+DonB]

That's one nice feature with Lowrance, my iFinder Hunt will accept the GC code plus the complete cache name. I don't really know what the limit is for number of characters.

 

Not trying to brag, just being informative.

Edited January 6, 2007 by DWBur