I have been using Street & Trips since 2002 and with the GPX export was hoping for more. Microsoft Streets and Trips 2010 export GPX will only export route points and no voids and no GPS tracks. Reading the help will only import tracks and will not export tracks. The Voids are much better than waypoints because this confuses people and think this is a stop or a point of interest. Voids also solve the problem of the GPS showing the next stop as a waypoint.
Conclusion: Import GPX in most cases will not be the route planned or traveled.
The tips was interesting about route and blank “Bogus” Stops.
Conclusion: Import GPX in most cases will not be the route planned or traveled.
The tips was interesting about route and blank “Bogus” Stops.
Looks like the GPX format does not support the time duration at a stop. All you stops times and overnight stays no longer exist.
This first cut at it is pretty basic, for sure. But it's a start and it is already providing a lot of value for many users. We can only hope that Microsoft listens to the requests and extends what the GPX import and export can do in subsequent versions. At least now we have an alternative to having to try to convert .EST files through products like GPS Babel which are also useful but also have their limitations.
...ken...
...ken...
Without doubt, some of the richness of a route thoughtfully compiled in S&T 2010 using many of the app's features gets lost in a GPX export. It is still best just to save the *.est file.
*.est is by far the best. Someday GPX standard will be enhanced to support what S&T has.
Quote:
It is still best just to save the *.est file.
Given that sharing routes and waypoints is the most likely use of GPX export/import I can understand why Microsoft is being careful how much detail to convert, just in case the receiving unit doesn't know how to deal with some of the stuff that S&T does.
For instance, Garmin units would have no idea how to deal with stop durations. Garmin doesn't even treat them as "stops". They are just routepoints, eg. points along the way that force the direction of the route to go through them. Garmin planning software and GPS devices have no concept of stopping at points along a route.
...ken...
GPX standard could have attributes for stop durations and the Garmin would just through that attribute away because it did not understand. I am thinking this is what the XML standard is about.
I sure more attribute will be added in the future when the parties agree on the attributes.
I sure more attribute will be added in the future when the parties agree on the attributes.
Quote:
... The problem comes up when you want to share it with someone who may only have a personal navigation device...
...ken...
...ken...
No need to guess about what is in and what is not in GPX. Refer to the GPX standard: GPX 1.1 Schema Documentation
The GPX file format is only at version 1.1. That's because it was developed in 2002, and the last modification was in 2004. The main problem is that GPX is a de facto standard, and even worse, a standard created by a single company. There's no standards body meeting regularly to decide on improvements, as there is for, say, HTML.
To see any improvements in GPX, we would need one of these companies to take the initiative and get the interested parties together.
That having been said, GPX 1.1 is sufficient for the application mentioned (stopping over). No changes to the standard are required. You simply list the waypoint/point twice, with two different times. The fact that you haven't moved between those two time points indicates that you've stopped over.
The GPX file format is only at version 1.1. That's because it was developed in 2002, and the last modification was in 2004. The main problem is that GPX is a de facto standard, and even worse, a standard created by a single company. There's no standards body meeting regularly to decide on improvements, as there is for, say, HTML.
To see any improvements in GPX, we would need one of these companies to take the initiative and get the interested parties together.
That having been said, GPX 1.1 is sufficient for the application mentioned (stopping over). No changes to the standard are required. You simply list the waypoint/point twice, with two different times. The fact that you haven't moved between those two time points indicates that you've stopped over.
Quote:
No need to guess about what is in and what is not in GPX. Refer to the GPX standard: GPX 1.1 Schema Documentation
The GPX file format is only at version 1.1. That's because it was developed in 2002, and the last modification was in 2004. The main problem is that GPX is a de facto standard, and even worse, a standard created by a single company. There's no standards body meeting regularly to decide on improvements, as there is for, say, HTML.
To see any improvements in GPX, we would need one of these companies to take the initiative and get the interested parties together.
That having been said, GPX 1.1 is sufficient for the application mentioned (stopping over). No changes to the standard are required. You simply list the waypoint/point twice, with two different times. The fact that you haven't moved between those two time points indicates that you've stopped over.
The GPX file format is only at version 1.1. That's because it was developed in 2002, and the last modification was in 2004. The main problem is that GPX is a de facto standard, and even worse, a standard created by a single company. There's no standards body meeting regularly to decide on improvements, as there is for, say, HTML.
To see any improvements in GPX, we would need one of these companies to take the initiative and get the interested parties together.
That having been said, GPX 1.1 is sufficient for the application mentioned (stopping over). No changes to the standard are required. You simply list the waypoint/point twice, with two different times. The fact that you haven't moved between those two time points indicates that you've stopped over.
The only thing I was able discover was web location of the schema documentation but devices only support some of the types like S&T 2010 will import trkTYPE but does not export the GPS tracks. I need to make sure to stay with the lowest supported functions.
I am trying to make group road trips more enjoyable for everyone with so many people today purchasing GPS navigations systems.
Quote:
.. Voids also solve the problem of the GPS showing the next stop as a waypoint.
...
...
If you create a route in Garmin's Mapsource planning program and save it as a GPX file, there will be all the routepoints ("stops"), just as in the same file saved from Streets&Trips. But Mapsource will have a load of additional entries to cover all of the turns between the stops. Those are the "voids" bj is refering to.
I've attached a sample GPX file of a really simple route between to stops created in Mapsource so you can see what a full route file contains, if you're interested.
...ken...
I've attached a sample GPX file of a really simple route between to stops created in Mapsource so you can see what a full route file contains, if you're interested.
...ken...
I should of used the word avoid area (S&T) not voids.
Example is the before and after gif pictures: Say you are traveling from Chilliwack to Kelowna Canada and you like to travel by way of the E. C. Manning Provincial Park. You are required to put another stop (waypoint) or you can in S&T put avoids area (for Hwy 5).
Sometimes S&T require a number of stops (waypoints) to travel the route desired but a void (S&T avoid area) will not show on the route.
Example is the before and after gif pictures: Say you are traveling from Chilliwack to Kelowna Canada and you like to travel by way of the E. C. Manning Provincial Park. You are required to put another stop (waypoint) or you can in S&T put avoids area (for Hwy 5).
Sometimes S&T require a number of stops (waypoints) to travel the route desired but a void (S&T avoid area) will not show on the route.
Quote:
If you create a route in Garmin's Mapsource planning program and save it as a GPX file, there will be all the routepoints ("stops"), just as in the same file saved from Streets&Trips. But Mapsource will have a load of additional entries to cover all of the turns between the stops. Those are the "voids" bj is refering to.
I've attached a sample GPX file of a really simple route between to stops created in Mapsource so you can see what a full route file contains, if you're interested.
...ken...
I've attached a sample GPX file of a really simple route between to stops created in Mapsource so you can see what a full route file contains, if you're interested.
...ken...
I would like to see S&T move towards a more complete Import/Export regime for GPX so that all these sorts of things are dealt with to create a true import/export functionality.
Coincidentally, I was amused to see the map that pops up in S&T from this GPX file was centered (more or less) on the Sandman Hotel where I stayed over night last year!
Thanks!
Taoyue said there is no standards body. This surprised me because Microsoft is on so many xml standards like html, and SQL Server. With S&T now supporting gpx maybe Microsoft will help support additions to gpx.
Strictly speaking, Garmin is not complying with the GPX standard either. According to the standard, "rte represents route - an ordered list of waypoints representing a series of turn points leading to a destination."
Instead of listing all the turn points, Garmin included only stops in exporting GPX. It then extended GPX with its own schema to put in turn points. The proper way to extend GPX would have been to do it the other way around: export all the turn points, and then extend the GPX schema to indicate which of them are stops.
S&T is doing the same thing by exporting only stops. This is not necessarily illogical -- consider the situation where S&T puts turn points on a street that is missing from the outdated map on a standalone unit. But it's unfortunate that GPX wasn't designed with route planning portability in mind. A simple attribute could've avoided all this trouble.
At this point, the best thing that could happen would be for Microsoft to adopt the Garmin extensions, and then get together with Garmin to hash out future additions.
Instead of listing all the turn points, Garmin included only stops in exporting GPX. It then extended GPX with its own schema to put in turn points. The proper way to extend GPX would have been to do it the other way around: export all the turn points, and then extend the GPX schema to indicate which of them are stops.
S&T is doing the same thing by exporting only stops. This is not necessarily illogical -- consider the situation where S&T puts turn points on a street that is missing from the outdated map on a standalone unit. But it's unfortunate that GPX wasn't designed with route planning portability in mind. A simple attribute could've avoided all this trouble.
At this point, the best thing that could happen would be for Microsoft to adopt the Garmin extensions, and then get together with Garmin to hash out future additions.
Unfortunately, the GPX 1.1 standard does not include 'voids' and other specific elements that would allow the actual route details (beyond just the route waypoints) to be part of the GPX file.
Garmin chose to deal with this limitation by augmenting the GPX format with additinal extensions. If you view the GPX file (that K_in_R attached - thanks Ken!) in a text editor you can see it is full of GPXX elements. These GPXX elements are Garmin-specific and provide more structured data for GPS data.
It would be like if Microsoft decided to add some new elements to the GPX file that would only be recognized by S&T. <STPXX:...> Microsoft GPX is based on the the GPS Exchange Format schema. Pure and simple.
Garmin chose to deal with this limitation by augmenting the GPX format with additinal extensions. If you view the GPX file (that K_in_R attached - thanks Ken!) in a text editor you can see it is full of GPXX elements. These GPXX elements are Garmin-specific and provide more structured data for GPS data.
It would be like if Microsoft decided to add some new elements to the GPX file that would only be recognized by S&T. <STPXX:...> Microsoft GPX is based on the the GPS Exchange Format schema. Pure and simple.
Larry, you posted 20 minutes after me, so I wasn't sure if you got a chance to read before you started typing. You might want to re-read my post -- I both address the Garmin extensions and suggest a course of action.
Note also that the GPX standard specifically states that "a series of turn points leading to a destination" should be given. Turn points -- not just stops or intermediate destinations. Both Garmin and Microsoft have chosen to leave out the turn points and export only the stops.
It's too late to change the existing uses of GPX 1.1 -- but not too late to work on an industry-standard GPX 2.0 that resolves the problems. It'd be a very good thing for the location-aware software/services industry if Microsoft would take the initiative, get together with Topographix, Garmin, and other interested parties, and rescue the standard before more companies come up with their own competing incompatible extension schemas.
Note also that the GPX standard specifically states that "a series of turn points leading to a destination" should be given. Turn points -- not just stops or intermediate destinations. Both Garmin and Microsoft have chosen to leave out the turn points and export only the stops.
It's too late to change the existing uses of GPX 1.1 -- but not too late to work on an industry-standard GPX 2.0 that resolves the problems. It'd be a very good thing for the location-aware software/services industry if Microsoft would take the initiative, get together with Topographix, Garmin, and other interested parties, and rescue the standard before more companies come up with their own competing incompatible extension schemas.
taoyue,
we were responding at the same time. I read your points (now) and totally agree that the GPX standard needs help to improve interoperability between all devices and software applications. I'll see what I can do.
we were responding at the same time. I read your points (now) and totally agree that the GPX standard needs help to improve interoperability between all devices and software applications. I'll see what I can do.
Quote:
Ah, I see, Ken. S&T ignores all those voids and forces one to create a route from the menu of Stops only.
The example file I attached does not have an "avoid" area in it. It is the simplest direct route between the two "stops" using the current routing settings ("shortest route" in this case). The route is in the city and has a number of turns to get between the two.
The routing software in any navigation device wants to know how to deal with all the possible items in the map database that it will have to deal with along the way. Not only turns to take but also where you need to stay going straight at an intersection. It can determine that in two ways. If you give it a route with the detail such as in the sample file I attached, it can simply use it exactly as is. If you only give it the "stops", as Streets&Trips does in its exported GPX route files, then you must tell the receiving device to recalculate the route and figure all that stuff out on its own.
...ken...
Thanks, Larry. Hope it works out.
Thanks taoyue, Larry and Ken for the input, which help greatly in my understanding of what XML standardard are and the problems. I do not own Garmin but will be communicating with them in the future.