Jump to content

Geocaching API


Recommended Posts

Personally, I wouldn't mind seeing a very limited API that closes a gap in the offline database scheme they claim to not want, yet still provide for it.

 

I exclude caches from my PQ via various attributes of which one is certain sizes. Sometimes the size changes from one that I include to one that I exclude. I end up with an orphaned cache in the OLDB. Sometimes the cache is archived which also leaves an orphaned cache.

 

To update my OLDB I then have to visit each page to determine the reason it was not included.

 

An API that allows me to punch in a waypoint number and it spit out just the details would be fantastic. It would save bandwidth on their end and a lot of time on my end.

 

It could trivially be limited by individual account key much like the way Google Earth is handled. For my uses, a 100 queries a day would more than enough. A way for GSAK to filter on caches that didn't get updated and go check to see why would a wildly fanastic boon, IMHO. I would allow full automation all the way through to loading the PDA and GPS.

 

Add a way to write logs offline, say on a non-connected laptop, or Cachemate, and upload in bulk. Field notes gets us almost there, not quite.

 

Of course, I'm confused as to way they don't have a lo-fi version of site: something between the full site and the WAP site. It would work better for internet attached devices like PDA's, BlackBerrys and such.

Link to comment

There is a private API and it is available for trusted partners. We have no plans to offer an open public API at this time. It was considered in the past but the current decison is to keep it private.

 

So I take it that "Trimble", the makers of Geocache Navigator are a trusted parnter? And are probably paying a nice fee to use the API? (since they charge a monthly fee to use their software, which I find insane, you should only have to pay once, and maybe pay for significant upgrades)

 

I'm a software developer, and am currently playing around with writing a GPS application for windows mobile phones in my spare time, and would love to integrate it with the Geocaching database.

 

Hence the reason why Groundspeak hasn't released a geocaching app for the Blackberry. It's about $ coming from Trimble to use the API.

Link to comment

There is a geocaching app for Blackberry called Cacheberry. Its not live though - used the gpx's. I love it!

I also have the paid-for version of Geocache Navigator on my Blackberry, which I ONLY use when I'm in areas I haven't created PQs for. And thats only if theres cellphone coverage in that area. And for the kinds of caches I like to do, theres very few areas that do have coverage! So Cacheberry is awesome!

 

Would be nice if I could cut Geocache Navigator out completely though. I just don't like it!

Link to comment

I read through all of this because in the slightest hope I searched for 'Geocaching API'. I'm going to be running a small event introducing geocaching and we thought about each kid(less than 20) creating a travelbug which they can later go home and follow with their parents. We don't have budget to buy tags and would really like to just write codes on items.

 

Right now if there was a Public(free) API I would create a webpage that was more simple than geocaching.com for people to follow their geocache. It would have some of our branding, an explanation of geocaching/travelbugs and a link(s) to geocaching.com pages for those that want to do it themselves. I could do this well with a basic API such as geocache code to location, and no travelbug features.

 

With a private/paid API I might be tempted to create a travelbug/trackable website where you can buy cheap trackable codes to write on objects. That would allow me to pay Geocaching.com and should allow me to afford to give away a few freebies to myself.

 

For both of those things I need to have at least a page/documentation about the API to be sure of what I can do and if I will be able to get along with the API.

 

There are some things geocaching.com can do and still provide a great API.

* Make the API public/free for low-use (e.g. me testing and first ~5 friends trying) before developers need to pay a set amount(maybe levels depending on usage). Then they should have their site proved and can charge per user or use their own ad revenue.

* Above can also allow projects to be developed but there is a point where developers have to request Groundspeak check and approve them before granting high-use(e.g. >10 requests an hour) for free or paid. I don't think there would be too many doing this to cause a great work load.

* API terms can disallow projects that match existing GS services without any distinct difference or disallow projects that directly compete with GS. For example this might rule out me selling my own trackable codes, unless it's allowed through because you can write free codes on anything.

* A read-only API, so you still want to go to geocaching.com to log your find and keep your score up.

 

Remember it's not just great to have geocaching on the device that is hot and new. What if I have some old or strange phone I want a geocaching.com system on and maybe only I and 2 others will use it but I can try making it. What if I work for a device manufacturer and we want a geocaching app as soon as the device is on sale, we don't want to wait until GS works out: it's cool, how to write apps, and gets on with it.

 

If I remember pocket queries correctly then they don't woerk for a lot of things other than personal listings/stats pages. The user has to set up the request and get the file of the area they want. You can't query for a few caches the 3rd party website has asked for and your probably not able to select a whole country(ies) to import to a db copy which you'll work on.

 

Sadly we are in a state that GS and geocaching.com have a mega number of caches and users, nobody will go to and stay with a new website that only has caches the developer hid. Despite the 'geocaching' name not being a trademark and the hobby developed from the crowdsourcing of hiding caches.

 

If someone can provide me on details(connection/authentication methods, and functions/data available) in the private API please tell me. It would be helpful for me to think about how much of my idea I can do and how long it will take, before deciding if I'm serious enough to talk to contact@geocaching.com about what it is and if they'll give me access.

Link to comment

I read through all of this because in the slightest hope I searched for 'Geocaching API'.

blah, blah, blah ...

 

go back re-read post #12, that should help.

 

Post 12:

There is a private API and it is available for trusted partners. We have no plans to offer an open public API at this time. It was considered in the past but the current decison is to keep it private.

 

And that means I can't add to the discussion why I would really like a public API or a publicly-documented private API? "current decison" was written 2 years ago, maybe Jeremy/GS would welcome points new to discuss.

 

As I said, "I need to have at least a page/documentation about the API to be sure of what I can do and if I will be able to get along with the API." ...before for I want to go contacting a generic GS e-mail to wait for a reply and gain access.

 

Please do not snap at me with references to stuff I've read because you don't recognise me daily replying to forum threads. I actually moved on from my geocaching obsession to an OpenStreetMap.org obsession because it has an API. The crowdsourcing community(yes GC.com has one too) is supported by a solvent organisation in a very good way. Maps made by the community can be displayed on anything someone wants: online/offline, Garmin GPS, random old phones, new iphones/androids/etc, printed in a hundred different formats and designs of any size. All because the data is available for anyone to do what they like with.

 

I suppose if I start a thread about Geocaching.com alternatives, I will be bashed and/or the thread will be deleted?

Link to comment

I paid for the official Geocaching app for my Droid, but I still prefer to use c:geo because of some of the unique features. I understand the bandwidth demand the apps cause, and that Groundspeak doesn't get any income for supporting that from c:geo users, but I still hope something can be worked out. Maybe royalties? user fees? (within reason). My hope is that Carnero and Groundspeak can come to some agreement and he'll continue support of his great app with cooperation from Groundspeak.

- Run&Hike

Link to comment

I paid for the official Geocaching app for my Droid, but I still prefer to use c:geo because of some of the unique features. I understand the bandwidth demand the apps cause, and that Groundspeak doesn't get any income for supporting that from c:geo users, but I still hope something can be worked out. Maybe royalties? user fees? (within reason). My hope is that Carnero and Groundspeak can come to some agreement and he'll continue support of his great app with cooperation from Groundspeak.

- Run&Hike

Groundspeak came to an agreement. Carnero did not. It seems that Carnero, for whatever reason, refuses to use the forthcoming API and apparently he is getting tired of fixing his non-compliant application every time Groundspeak updates the website.

Link to comment

I paid for the official Geocaching app for my Droid, but I still prefer to use c:geo because of some of the unique features. I understand the bandwidth demand the apps cause, and that Groundspeak doesn't get any income for supporting that from c:geo users, but I still hope something can be worked out. Maybe royalties? user fees? (within reason). My hope is that Carnero and Groundspeak can come to some agreement and he'll continue support of his great app with cooperation from Groundspeak.

- Run&Hike

Groundspeak came to an agreement. Carnero did not. It seems that Carnero, for whatever reason, refuses to use the forthcoming API and apparently he is getting tired of fixing his non-compliant application every time Groundspeak updates the website.

 

What I get from his post and the feedback topic is Groundspeak has offered a lesser version of the api to developers while reserving a newer, better version for themselves.

 

Sounds kind of like Groundspeak invited Carnero to the table; the children's table.

Link to comment

I paid for the official Geocaching app for my Droid, but I still prefer to use c:geo because of some of the unique features. I understand the bandwidth demand the apps cause, and that Groundspeak doesn't get any income for supporting that from c:geo users, but I still hope something can be worked out. Maybe royalties? user fees? (within reason). My hope is that Carnero and Groundspeak can come to some agreement and he'll continue support of his great app with cooperation from Groundspeak.

- Run&Hike

Groundspeak came to an agreement. Carnero did not. It seems that Carnero, for whatever reason, refuses to use the forthcoming API and apparently he is getting tired of fixing his non-compliant application every time Groundspeak updates the website.

 

I read the "geocide" post the he made and it really came across as if he was placing all the blame on Groundspeak. He makes it sound like GS has not tried to present an agreement and hasn't communicated at all other than stating that the don't like it. I would be interested in hearing Groundspeaks side of the story.

 

I'd read awhile back about a specific issue that GS had with the app that he doesn't mention regarding spoofing the request header to the geocaching.com site to obtain information for screenscraping. In the geocide post he mentions the code being available through a source code repository so I downloaded and confirmed that the app is setting a header which makes it appear as it the application making the request is a Browser.

Link to comment

I paid for the official Geocaching app for my Droid, but I still prefer to use c:geo because of some of the unique features. I understand the bandwidth demand the apps cause, and that Groundspeak doesn't get any income for supporting that from c:geo users, but I still hope something can be worked out. Maybe royalties? user fees? (within reason). My hope is that Carnero and Groundspeak can come to some agreement and he'll continue support of his great app with cooperation from Groundspeak.

- Run&Hike

Groundspeak came to an agreement. Carnero did not. It seems that Carnero, for whatever reason, refuses to use the forthcoming API and apparently he is getting tired of fixing his non-compliant application every time Groundspeak updates the website.

 

What I get from his post and the feedback topic is Groundspeak has offered a lesser version of the api to developers while reserving a newer, better version for themselves.

 

Sounds kind of like Groundspeak invited Carnero to the table; the children's table.

Sucks, but it's their house

Link to comment

I paid for the official Geocaching app for my Droid, but I still prefer to use c:geo because of some of the unique features. I understand the bandwidth demand the apps cause, and that Groundspeak doesn't get any income for supporting that from c:geo users, but I still hope something can be worked out. Maybe royalties? user fees? (within reason). My hope is that Carnero and Groundspeak can come to some agreement and he'll continue support of his great app with cooperation from Groundspeak.

- Run&Hike

Groundspeak came to an agreement. Carnero did not. It seems that Carnero, for whatever reason, refuses to use the forthcoming API and apparently he is getting tired of fixing his non-compliant application every time Groundspeak updates the website.

 

What I get from his post and the feedback topic is Groundspeak has offered a lesser version of the api to developers while reserving a newer, better version for themselves.

 

Sounds kind of like Groundspeak invited Carnero to the table; the children's table.

After reading and parsing Bryan's post on the feedback site, some of Jeremy's posts on Facebook and Carnero's geo-cide I think the issue is the API he was offered required premium membership for it to work. It was fully functional and had all the features of the API being used in the official apps, it just required a login and premium membership while the official apps did not have that restriction. He chose not to have that restriction.

Link to comment

I paid for the official Geocaching app for my Droid, but I still prefer to use c:geo because of some of the unique features. I understand the bandwidth demand the apps cause, and that Groundspeak doesn't get any income for supporting that from c:geo users, but I still hope something can be worked out. Maybe royalties? user fees? (within reason). My hope is that Carnero and Groundspeak can come to some agreement and he'll continue support of his great app with cooperation from Groundspeak.

- Run&Hike

Groundspeak came to an agreement. Carnero did not. It seems that Carnero, for whatever reason, refuses to use the forthcoming API and apparently he is getting tired of fixing his non-compliant application every time Groundspeak updates the website.

 

What I get from his post and the feedback topic is Groundspeak has offered a lesser version of the api to developers while reserving a newer, better version for themselves.

 

Sounds kind of like Groundspeak invited Carnero to the table; the children's table.

Sucks, but it's their house

 

True. I didn't pass judgegment either way. Just seems there is a reason for not using the api. Wish I knew more about programming to comment further.

Link to comment

I paid for the official Geocaching app for my Droid, but I still prefer to use c:geo because of some of the unique features. I understand the bandwidth demand the apps cause, and that Groundspeak doesn't get any income for supporting that from c:geo users, but I still hope something can be worked out. Maybe royalties? user fees? (within reason). My hope is that Carnero and Groundspeak can come to some agreement and he'll continue support of his great app with cooperation from Groundspeak.

- Run&Hike

Groundspeak came to an agreement. Carnero did not. It seems that Carnero, for whatever reason, refuses to use the forthcoming API and apparently he is getting tired of fixing his non-compliant application every time Groundspeak updates the website.

 

What I get from his post and the feedback topic is Groundspeak has offered a lesser version of the api to developers while reserving a newer, better version for themselves.

 

Sounds kind of like Groundspeak invited Carnero to the table; the children's table.

After reading and parsing Bryan's post on the feedback site, some of Jeremy's posts on Facebook and Carnero's geo-cide I think the issue is the API he was offered required premium membership for it to work. It was fully functional and had all the features of the API being used in the official apps, it just required a login and premium membership while the official apps did not have that restriction. He chose not to have that restriction.

 

Sounds reasonable to me then. If people prefer to continue using cgeo which Groundspeak receives no fee from, premium membership seems about right.

 

Perhaps a few people with programming skills could pick up the project and continue it.

Link to comment
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...