+Mr. Snazz Posted January 30, 2003 Share Posted January 30, 2003 What do you think, for caches which have been found (currently identified by "Geocache Found" in the sym node), of including the date of when the user found it? Personally I'd like this information, to be able to sort found caches by the date that I found them. Link to comment
+fizzymagic Posted January 30, 2003 Share Posted January 30, 2003 I keep an Access database of my finds, along with the time and date I found them, so that I have them in the actual order I found them. I also keep track of the actual coordinates of the find, which is useful for puzzle caches and multicaches (I keep the last stage). I think it's asking a little too much of geocaching.com to do all of this for the users, since they can quite easily do it for themselves. Link to comment
+Mr. Snazz Posted January 30, 2003 Author Share Posted January 30, 2003 If found/not found status is included in GPX, I don't see how its any more inappropriate to include the date that the find occured on. Users could easily go look up just about everything that GPX provides. The point is, to be able to sort by found date within a GPX viewing application (such as the GPX viewer for pocketpc). Link to comment
+fizzymagic Posted January 30, 2003 Share Posted January 30, 2003 Oh -- I see. The node can contain a different symbol for found caches. Adding the date found would be a pretty major change, though... Link to comment
+Mr. Snazz Posted January 30, 2003 Author Share Posted January 30, 2003 Would it be a terrible sin to add a node, eg. 2002-01-04? This doesn't strike me as being a very major change. Link to comment
+fizzymagic Posted January 31, 2003 Share Posted January 31, 2003 Because now the GPX file is no longer a generic cache file, but tied very closely to a single individual. Link to comment
+ClayJar Posted January 31, 2003 Share Posted January 31, 2003 quote:Originally posted by fizzymagic:It's a VERY major change Because now the GPX file is no longer a generic cache file, but tied very closely to a single individual. I don't think that reasoning is valid. The Pocket Query GPX files are already "tied very closely to a single individual." This is why Watcher asks whether to add caches the GPX says are found to your found list. It would be just as easy to ignore the element *and* any hypothetical element as it is to simply ignore the element, which is the current state of things. I'm not sure if Geocaching.com wants to add the found date, but I can see no reason not to, other than any additional resources it may use while generating the Pocket Query files. If they decide to add the field, I will support it in Watcher. Link to comment
+Mr. Snazz Posted January 31, 2003 Author Share Posted January 31, 2003 quote:Originally posted by fizzymagic:Because now the GPX file is no longer a generic cache file, but tied very closely to a single individual. By specifying the "Found cache" symbol in , its already tied very closely to a single individual. Link to comment
+Sissy-n-CR Posted January 31, 2003 Share Posted January 31, 2003 I wouldn't mind a found date AND time tag (or whatever you call it). You could make your logs in order of actually finding them. Also, what would be useful is the in inclusion of your log. That way, if your log in not one of the latest 5 logs you can still get it. You'd be able to create a list of the caches you've found, your log entries, and links to the caches AND your log entries on GC.com. Just a thought. CR Link to comment
+ClayJar Posted January 31, 2003 Share Posted January 31, 2003 quote:Originally posted by Sissy-n-CR:I wouldn't mind a found date AND time tag (or whatever you call it). You could make your logs in order of actually finding them. I wouldn't mind that, either. However, since that information is not in the Geocaching.com database, and since (as far as I know) Jeremy is neither psychic nor a time-traveller (although either would explain a lot)... in the immortal words of HAL, "I'm afraid I can't do that, Dave." quote:Also, what would be useful is the inclusion of your log. That way, if your log is not one of the latest 5 logs you can still get it. You'd be able to create a list of the caches you've found, your log entries, and links to the caches AND your log entries on GC.com.Since there is obviously code there already to find if the cache is found, it might be a relatively simple problem to add the found date. If it can be done easily and without a significant performance hit, it would be a valuable addition. It's up to Jeremy, et al, to decide whether it can or should be done, but if they decide to do it, I'll support it. As for getting a GPX of everything you've ever done, that would seem very likely to be something that the Pocket Query generator is not currently built to handle. Perhaps at some point they'll add a special "This Is $USERNAME's Life (Now In GPX-Vision!)" feature, which would be immensely cool, but that's a topic for another thread. Link to comment
+Sissy-n-CR Posted January 31, 2003 Share Posted January 31, 2003 quote:Originally posted by ClayJar:I wouldn't mind that, either. However, since that information is not in the Geocaching.com database, and since (as far as I know) Jeremy is neither psychic nor a time-traveller (although either would explain a lot)... in the immortal words of HAL, "I'm afraid I can't do that, Dave." No, I meant so we could put it in and keep a record of our caches. The list could then be sorted on date/time instead of just date. If we had to, we counld just make up a time... Wait a minute! I just thought of something. Are the log entry IDs unique? If so, then all you have to do is sort by log entry ID. That'd make it must easier. So, then how come finds are all out of order even though I put them in, in the order I found them? Seems like a simple solution. CR Link to comment
+ClayJar Posted January 31, 2003 Share Posted January 31, 2003 quote:Originally posted by Sissy-n-CR: No, I meant so _we_ could put it in and keep a record of our caches. The list could then be sorted on date/time instead of just date. If we had to, we could just make up a time... Hehe. All the timestamps in the GPX (i.e. the so-called "dates") are date and time, so if the application used them, you could indeed set the specific times by hand. quote:Wait a minute! I just thought of something. Are the log entry IDs unique? If so, then all you have to do is sort by log entry ID. That'd make it must easier. The log IDs are indeed unique. Assuming people log caches in the order they did them, it would indeed be possible to sort by date and sub-sort by log ID. quote:So, then how come finds are all out of order even though I put them in, in the order I found them? Seems like a simple solution. Geocaching.com doesn't sub-sort by log ID. However, since log ID is a value based on the order the log was added to the Geocaching.com database and not necessarily the order the cache was found/not-found/whatevered, doing a sub-sort by log ID would not necessarily help. It's not unfair to consider that they might not be sub-sorting by log ID because it will not necessarily give any better results. (Of course, I always log in order, so for me it would work.) If they ever add the "This Is $USERNAME's Life (Now In GPX-Vision)", I'd probably do a log ID sub-sort, but as for now, there's nothing to do about it... **Unless** they make the "found" element like: <Groundspeak:found id="$LOG_ID_NUMBER">$TIMESTAMP</Groundspeak:found>(That would give enough information to sort the caches by the most logical sort.) Link to comment
Recommended Posts