When do you want the new Watcher?

February 24, 2003

Okay, I've added lots of new things to Watcher, and version 0.1.31 is sitting on my PC waiting anxiously to be released (anthropomorphism, perhaps, but hey). There remains only one thing that needs to be done before I can release it.

I need an answer from Jeremy (or anyone who counts) to the *Very* important GPX request. thread.

Since tomorrow morning will be the four week anniversary of the thread, I figured I'd celebrate the event by having a little poll. Note that this is a thoroughly non-scientific poll and is only meant to get at least a few people to take notice of the fact that I am fast getting weary of waiting so long for a simple answer. (Note that by "an answer" I mean an answer in boolean (sense 2). A "yes or no" answer. True or false. A determinate answer.)

So, the question is simply this:

When do you want the next Watcher to be released?

5.3k · February 24, 2003

Why do you think you need Jeremy's permission to add the GPX field you want? Jeremy doesn't own the GPX format, and the Groundspeak extensions are just that: extensions. Since you aren't asking him to provide the field, just to allow it, I don't see why there should be any problem just implementing it. That's how most standards work, you know -- people just go ahead and do what needs to be done.

Granted, assent from TPTB would be nice, but at this point I think it's time to just go ahead and do it. If they had any serious problems I think you would have heard by now.

5.7k · February 24, 2003

Around my house, that's about all that's needed. And, come to think of it, that's not even needed. Everyone just does what they want and it all works out in the end. On second thought, maybe you need Joani's permission.

--Marky

"All of us get lost in the darkness, dreamers learn to steer with a backlit GPSr"

February 24, 2003

quote:
When do you want the next Watcher to be released?

Knowing the importance of this poll, I really tried to make an educated, well thought out vote. Unfortunately, I went digging through the old thread, and ran across the

Feature Presentation link that I hadn't seen before. Curious, I decided to check it out.

Pretty impressive. I scroll down. Wow. Cool filters.. Scroll down some more... Wow.. Edit your personal Found List... Cool... "Owners Special Filter"... wo... hey, wait! I'm at the top of the "Don't show these owners list?" What gives?

Just for that, my answer is "Never." Watcher's bits can all rot to FF on your machine as far as I care.

...

alex

(for those who don't know, ClayJar and I 'know' each other. This is just a poke in honest fun).

1.7k · February 25, 2003

quote:
Originally posted by fizzymagic:
Why do you think you need Jeremy's permission to add the GPX field you want? Jeremy doesn't own the GPX format, and the Groundspeak extensions are just that: extensions. Since you aren't asking him to _provide_ the field, just to _allow_ it, I don't see why there should be any problem just implementing it. That's how most standards work, you know -- people just go ahead and do what needs to be done.

Well, the thing is, ClayJar can't edit the schema, so he can't add random fields to his output or a validating XML parser would choke on Watcher files. The only thing he can do is add his own set of extensions on top of the set that's already there. That's something that was discussed in the original thread and in the IRC chat, but it's something ClayJar would rather avoid for fairly obvious reasons. In any case, Jeremy seems to understand the need for the extension, and he'll probably add it at some point, but he's obviously pretty preoccupied with the new Rock 'n' Roll Geocaching.com and has let this fairly simple change slip to the back burner. So for ClayJar to create another schema just to add this one field that will eventually be redundant would be sub-optimal.

5.3k · February 25, 2003

See, the thing is that Groundspeak is already emitting GPX files that fail validating parsers. I don't think Watcher uses one anyway.

While it would be nice to have the field included in the Groundspeak schema, for the time being that doesn't seem to be happening. I just don't see why Watcher should be held up by it.

February 25, 2003

Since the reason I won't release the next update to Watcher is that I don't want to potentially splinter the Groundspeak namespace, we have an alternative that could be considered.

If and only if we the developers of Groundspeak-extension-comprehending GPX utilities can reach a de facto agreement on what the node will be and what it means, then we would not need Jeremy to add the node before moving forward.

The proposed one-line change to the Groundspeak cache XSD is to add the following (more details in the previous thread):

<xs:element name="exported" msdata:Prefix="Groundspeak" type="xs:dateTime" minOccurs="0" />

This would mean that if "//gpx/wpt/Groundspeak:cache[@id=$ID]/Groundspeak:exported" exists, it is the canonical exported timestamp of that waypoint's cache details. If that node does not exist, all waypoints in a GPX are assumed to be exported with the timestamp specified in "//gpx/time".

When merging Groundspeak-extended GPX files, a program should use these fields in this order to determine which is the most recent cache waypoint. Also, as a general but non-deterministic rule, when transforming GPX contents into other formats, whether displayed on screen or saved in PalmDoc, HTML, or another arbitrary format, whenever possible and logical the exported timestamp should be included in order to preclude the inadvertant use of stale cache pages.

So, the question is now posed to all of us. In order for me to count it as a de facto agreement, we need an affirmative or non-negative reply by the developers of Watcher, GPX Spinner, gpx2html, GPX View (for PocketPC 2002), and GPX to PalmDoc. (And if I forgot someone, apologies and you too.)

Do you, Groundspeak/GPX developers, approve of the proposed node under as proposed in the "*Very* important GPX request." thread and noted here?

Watcher votes yes.

1.7k · February 25, 2003

GPX to PalmDoc votes yes, and notes that you missed GPSBabel.

5.3k · February 25, 2003

gpx2html votes yes. Like that's a surprise.

February 25, 2003

Well I am working on a GPX remailer. That is an email address that when a GPX is mailed to it from geocaching.com. My program extracts the GPX attachment creates other formats (currently plucker file and a Mapsource wpt file), and emails it to person requesting the GPX.

Anyway enough about that, I vote yes.

5.2k · February 25, 2003

GPX Spinner votes yes.

Lil Devil

February 26, 2003

GpxView votes YES

/Åke S

[This message was edited by Ake S on February 26, 2003 at 07:31 AM.]

1.7k · February 27, 2003

I've got a set of patches for GPSBabel to implement this support (GPX to PalmDoc doesn't care, as it doesn't merge and ignores tags it doesn't want) so assuming Robert accepts them into the tree, I'd call that a "yes" from that quarter.

5.3k · February 27, 2003

I added support for the new field into gpx2html already and put it up on the page. Watcher is looking very good, ClayJar!

Here's a question: in which forum should we make announcements of new versions of GPX software? This one doesn't seem quite right, but neither does the "GPS Units And Software" one.

1.7k · February 27, 2003

I thought "GPS Units and Software" seemed right, since that's where we discuss stuff like EasyGPS, but this seems to be the de facto place for them, as evidenced by the fact that my software faded from sight almost as soon as it was released.

By the way, Robert just committed my changes to GPSBabel to the CVS tree, so apparently he's voting at least "okay" if not "yes."

5.3k · February 27, 2003

quote:
Originally posted by Warm Fuzzies - Fuzzy:
I've got a set of patches for GPSBabel to implement this support (GPX to PalmDoc doesn't care, as it doesn't merge and ignores tags it doesn't want) so assuming Robert accepts them into the tree, I'd call that a "yes" from that quarter.

http://216.202.195.127/warm.gif

Robert just committed those changes wholescale to GPSBabel.

(That's my favorite kind of feature request: someone else doing the work. :-)

February 27, 2003

quote:
Originally posted by robertlipe:

Robert just committed those changes wholescale to GPSBabel.

(That's my favorite kind of feature request: someone else doing the work. :-)

I can't seem to find the new version?

1.7k · February 27, 2003

quote:
Originally posted by Nocturnal:
I can't seem to find the new version?

It's only in CVS at the moment; it hasn't been built for distribution yet.

1.3k · March 28, 2003

Poll results have disappeared during forum changes, so we all have to vote again...

9.1k · March 28, 2003

Well, ummm, actually we don't need to vote again, since we did receive Watcher v.1.31 quite a few weeks ago after the technical issue was resolved. Thank God. Uhhh, I mean, thank ClayJar. I'm sorry, I'm being redundant.

And while we're on the subject, Watcher v.1.32 was released last evening to fix some minor bugs and to add one small new feature. Yay!

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

I was formerly employed by the Department of Redundancy Department, but I don't work there anymore.

When do you want the new Watcher?

Recommended Posts

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment