Why are waypoint gpx files different from geocache?

[+Simrebel]

So Why are waypoint gpx files different from geocache gpx files?

 

Thought I would import my found waypoints into gsak to keep track of, and everything is messed up

Placed by's come up as category, it doesn't recognize as them as found by me

 

Wouldn't it make sense to have these two sites use the same standard, would make apps and 3rd party programs easier to create or migrate over to use waypoints

[+BruceS]

Having category show as the placed by was a choice made by the developer of GSAK. The category is very important in Waymarking and their is not equivalent in geocaching and it had to go somewhere, he chose the placed by field.

[+MountainWoods]

Waymarking.com uses the basic XML definition of the GPX file format with no extensions. When you look in the .gpx file, you are seeing the standard, basic definition of a waypoint in the GPX XML format. If you look at a .gpx file for a geocache, you'll notice that it is using a lot of Groundspeak extensions.

 

On the one hand, using the extensions gives a lot more information; but the device that consumes that information (your PC or your GPSr or you smart phone with an app) has to either recognize that information or ignore it. Since geocaching has been around for 13 years, most now-a-days things know about the Groundspeak geocache extensions to the basic waypoint XML definition. However, for Waymarking there is no (other) set of extensions yet, let alone a standard set that devices would recognize. They chose the basic definition of a waypoint so that any device would recognize it.

 

Having said all of that; yes, they could have used some of the Groundspeak extensions to give the waypoint more information, without breaking any of the devices (consumers) of the .gpx file. It's just another sign that Waymarking is an unwanted stepchild of Groundspeak.

 

IF (big if) you are a computer programmer of some sorts, you can take the .gpx file and modify it to make the waypoint look better; although you won't be able to automatically add in the information that is missing.

 

For example, I use gvim edit scripts to take the downloaded waypoint .gpx file and change the name of each waypoint from just the WM_____ ID to be the name of the Waymark followed by the ID in parenthesis, as in "Antioch Cemetery - Jacket, MO (WMGDQG)". I also change the symbol from a mere dot to something else, depending on why I've downloaded the waymark: a red pin if I want to visit someone else's waymark, a green pin for a waymark that I've just created but it isn't approved yet, a red flag if I've visited someone's waymark, or a green flag for my approved waymark, and so on.

 

I don't use GSAK myself. But from what I hear, it has an extensive macro language. I'll bet someone could take my gvim scripts and make them into GSAK macros to do the same things I'm doing -- or other things.

[+Simrebel]

Well i think Waymarking would be more popular if they made the gpx files compatible with the geocache gps files

then some of the apps for the phones would be able to use them.

 

I currently use c:geo and would be realy nice to see nearby waypoints when I am geocaching

[+L0ne.R]

You might be interested in Chilihead's mobile waymark site: http://www.chilehead.us/wm

[+mTn_biKer65]

I use GSAK to maintain separate waynarking & geocaching databases that are jointly sent to my garmin Oregon when I load it. I selected waymarks for found categories to appear as virtuals (ghost) and unfounded categories appear as webcams. Works great for me. I update my waynarking database a few times a month with Waymarks that have been placed in the last week or month or whatever time span I choose. Once updated I'll check the categories where the new Waymarks fall to see if the icon needs to be changed.

 

MTn_biKer65