Database of Geocaches?

[+LooneyTunes]

So, I know people have addressed this before, but I haven't been paying attention lately. Anyone know what would be involved in replicating the database of geocaches? The technical parts are well-defined and common practice, but what about actually making it happen.

 

The desired result, eventually, would be a more distributed and open database which could be sliced and diced in more custom fashions, special interests, traditional or virtual only views, different maps, etc.

 

Another advantage is it would be more robust and require less resource investment by any one party.

 

Is this possible?

[+The Leprechauns]

What would be involved? Either misappropriating the data here on GC.com, in violation of the terms of use, OR going to each cache owner and asking them if they would mind sharing their cache listing data with another listing service. I have only given my permission to Geocaching.com to publish the caches I've hidden.

 

I am quite happy with the ability to slice and dice the data given to me via pocket queries, in all the ways you describe plus many more, using the great tools that are made available to us.

 

x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x

Next time, instead of getting married, I think I'll just find a woman I don't like and buy her a house.

[+LooneyTunes]

NO, I would absolutely not think this should be done outside the agreements we have all made by using geocaching.com. It would be a lousy thing to do to scrape the data out of geocaching.com and then try to do something else with it.

 

This would be the kind of thing that would probably only ever happen (in the next few years, at least) if the people running geocaching.com were behind it.

 

One possible scenario would be that they would publish a standard XML way of describing geocaches, and then give other developers a place where they could access (i.e. download) the caches in that format. This is VERY EASY TO DO. There would also be XML messages that said, "This cache had been updated," or "This cache has been archived."

 

Then other sites would be able to present the data in other ways. And presumabely, the other sites would also be able to send those same XML documents to each other as well. So, a cache created on another site would appear on geocaching.com.

 

There are lots of other details, but this is all standard stuff. This kind of thing is exaclty why we have XML in the first place. Anyway, it's possible and nothing new.

 

The real change would be one of ideaology. Geocaching.com would have to decide not to be the controller of the caches. I don't mean to sound like I am judging or ridiculing geocaching.com here. I completely understand their position. I just disagree with it.

 

I think that it is time for geocaching to be controlled by the geocaching community, not by the people who created the first geocache database.

[+LooneyTunes]

And in case there is any question about whether or not other developers would step up to the place and create other "views" of the geocache database, we KNOW they would, because tehy have already tried to do so. Unfortunately they all have had no legitimate way to access the data, let alone contribute to it.

[+Renegade Knight]

It would take two things.

 

1) Geocaching.com providing the information.

 

or

 

2) Cache placers migrating their caches over to this database you are talking about.

 

Either could happen depending on exaclty what the future brings. As for other database developers for geocaching. As long as they are private individuals they will only get somewhere if they offer something that is so valuable that cache placers enmass move caches over.

[+Sissy-n-CR]

The main power of GC.com is the fact that all of the caches are in one place.

 

The main drawback of GC.com is the fact that all of the caches are in one place.

 

It's funny that this very issue has been on the forefront of my mind, but I've come to the conclusion that GC.com has developed an almost unstoppable momentum that no outside force can compete head-to-head.

 

No other site, unless gobs of money is used to develop it, could compete. Mainly because of GC.com has all of the caches. Why go anywhere else if GC.com has all fo the caches? There is no reason to. I've felt that way myself for a long time.

 

Some have said to list caches at both the "other" sites and here. But that is simply wasted effort. Why go over there if you can get it here? No, the only way to compete is to somehow get people to stop listing their caches here. How would you do that?

 

Open database? Not likely. Not when GC.com holds all of the cards. Why should they want to comply? That reminds me of the group trying to establish an IM protocol standard. They invited all of the developers of all of the IM platforms to present a working protocol. The last I heard, AOL choose not to participate--probably because they feel their AIM is the de facto standard. (Though it's hard to have a standard with only one server and you lock out everyone else.)

 

Anyway, GC.com is in the same position. The vast majority are going go with GC.com. The rest will have to follow or be left behind. Do you really think GC.com would adopt an outside protocol? I doubt it.

 

CR