"Audax Guidebook" idea (cf. participation)

[Greenbank]

I think the idea of a database where we could look up routes would be extremely useful. I am currently searching the net for a route for the four leaf clover I am doing next weekend and cannot find anything at all. Since I am crap at reading maps, don't own any and always get lost when trying to follow instructions I can see my first Audax aint going to go real well 

Routes for a certain event are sometimes tweaked each year (or some rides rotate through a bunch of different routes each year). The final route (for a GPX track) may not be known until the week before when the organiser does their final route check (and finds that one road they're relying on has been closed).

I've heard someone at an Audax moaning that the GPX file the organiser had put together didn't match exactly with the real world because of a minor detour caused by a road closed a couple of days before the event.

I've never had a problem with getting the routesheet a week before the event, plotting it somewhere (even if just spending 10 minutes with a £2 road atlas tracing through the names of the places on the routesheet) and then riding it.

[Ivo]

In Germany, especially for the NRW region, there's such a website with load's of info. Covering both the shortish sunday rides, the sportives and BRM's. hernolds-radseiten.de. A good site to learn form when setting up such an online guidebook.

[EdinburghFixed]

Routes for a certain event are sometimes tweaked each year (or some rides rotate through a bunch of different routes each year). The final route (for a GPX track) may not be known until the week before when the organiser does their final route check (and finds that one road they're relying on has been closed).

...

I've never had a problem with getting the routesheet a week before the event, plotting it somewhere (even if just spending 10 minutes with a £2 road atlas tracing through the names of the places on the routesheet) and then riding it.

I also go over the routesheet when I get it (in my case to create a GPS trace to download, as I don't use paper maps).

However this is slightly missing my motivation, which was more that people may not even be entering rides because of the absence of a map - so they're not going to receive the routesheet at all.

I've heard someone at an Audax moaning that the GPX file the organiser had put together didn't match exactly with the real world because of a minor detour caused by a road closed a couple of days before the event.

I think this is an understandable concern (especially for events which do change each year) - perhaps the simplest thing to do would be to have the maps published under the year that they were ridden, so you could say "Map for 2009 event (for indication only)" or something?

[Ivo]

I think this is an understandable concern (especially for events which do change each year) - perhaps the simplest thing to do would be to have the maps published under the year that they were ridden, so you could say "Map for 2009 event (for indication only)" or something?

That's what I'm reverting to for my events, mention in the track name the distance, town of start and the year.

[toontra]

I think this is an understandable concern (especially for events which do change each year) - perhaps the simplest thing to do would be to have the maps published under the year that they were ridden, so you could say "Map for 2009 event (for indication only)" or something?

That would be fine.  Personally I'm not looking for a route absolutely correct in every detail in advance.  What I want is a visual outline of the main thrust of the ride.  At the moment, in the absence of anything supplied by the organiser, I check Bikely and other places for that info (usually past years rides), create my own .gpx route based on that, and then when the routesheet comes I double-check it to make sure all the controls are included and the rest is more or less the same.  That's my responsibility, and wouldn't think of criticising the organiser if this process resulted in errors.

The database you are suggesting would vastly improve the current state of things, especially as an ever-increasing number of audaxers are navigating by GPS.

[phil d]

I think we would be treading a difficult path if we start making gpx files available openly.  Don't get me wrong - I'm quite happy that there should be file sharing between individuals, but there are a number of different ways of dealing with the creation of these files (for instance I know that Manotea and I set them up differently) such that there will be plenty of scope for complaint.

Anyway, I think receiving the routesheet and spending some time with the map (online OS in my case), whether to produce a gpx file or a paper map, is part of "doing the event".

In my view more pressure should be applied to organisers to provide a better synopsis of the ride in the calendar.  I don't put it forward as ideal, but it is hardly difficult to do as I have - www.aukweb.net/cal/calsolo.php?Ride=10-602

[toontra]

Anyway, I think receiving the route-sheet and spending some time with the map (online OS in my case), whether to produce a gpx file or a paper map, is part of "doing the event".

For a 400 or 600 that could take literally hours.  I honestly don't see the point in every individual having to re-do an event that's already been visualised by someone previously.  Also  (and this is a BIG factor for me) it's far easier to work up my own gpx route based on a visual route rather than a routesheet.  Quite often it's practically impossible to translate a routesheet instruction onto an online mapping page - the classic example would be "Turn left at Postbox" when there is no way of seeing where that postbox is online.

I really don't think the organisers would feel the need to take any criticism for these "database" routes - they would obviously be "user beware" and need to be checked against the event routesheet.

To be clear, I'm not wanting a fully-labelled .gpx route with each instruction labelled.  What I would like would be a visual representation, in Bikely or whatever form, as near a possible to the actual event route.

[mattc]

I really don't think the organisers would feel the need to take any criticism for these "database" routes - they would obviously be "user beware" and need to be checked against the event routesheet.

Oh, but they will get criticism (I've already seen it, here on YACF). Given that they get criticism for the routesheet* already, this just doubles the complaints!

*OK, sometimes these are justitfied, but we do our best, ok?

[toontra]

I really don't think the organisers would feel the need to take any criticism for these "database" routes - they would obviously be "user beware" and need to be checked against the event routesheet.

Oh, but they will get criticism (I've already seen it, here on YACF). Given that they get criticism for the routesheet* already, this just doubles the complaints!

*OK, sometimes these are justitfied, but we do our best, ok?

Simple caveats ("user beware" and "check against routesheet") would mean the organiser could quickly dismiss any such criticism.

50 individuals creating the same .gpx route from scratch from the routesheet for a 400, 600 or 1000 event is frankly ridiculous.

[EdinburghFixed]

Of course there is a relatively simple solution to this concern - we have only the events of willing organisers on the "guidebook" site in the first place.

I was half going to suggest that a condition of inclusion might be to have online entry anyway*. This is so controversial that a requirement to have some sort of map might slip under the radar? ;-)


* maybe not. I don't know!

[AndyH]

I generally do a gpx for rides I do, for my Edge 305 (mentioned because of the 100 waypoint limit), using either marengo or bikehike. Obviously very willing to share them or to contribute in any other way.

Sometimes it can take hours.

"Turn left at Postbox" when there is no way of seeing where that postbox is online.

especially when I've used google streetview to look for the bloody postbox !

ukaudaxguide.org.uk available  2 years - £5.98 - and loads of other domain names. Apart from the hosting and the domain name and the volunteers what is required to get this going? Does it need to be 'cleared' with AUK? Apart from putting a link into MS word I know nothing of the hidden workings of the web.

[saturn]

Of course there is a relatively simple solution to this concern - we have only the events of willing organisers on the "guidebook" site in the first place.

But those organisers might be the ones who already publish a reasonable amount of info. IMHO we need to provide a way of riders sharing knowledge about the less well publicised events and giving the organisers the option of adding info themselves if they wish. Could each entry have separate sections for organiser's info and rider's info? The latter on the basis of "route from 200X" the former giving organisers the facility to upload / link to a route for the current year themselves. I wouldn't be surprised if there are quite a few organisers who create a route on a mapping site or have a GPX but don't have a means of publishing it.

Personally I'm happy to make a decision to ride an event based on an approximate route and then create my own GPX either from the routesheet or by tailoring a supplied GPX.

[mattc]

But those organisers might be the ones who already publish a reasonable amount of info. IMHO we need to provide a way of riders sharing knowledge about the less well publicised events and giving the organisers the option of adding info themselves if they wish. Could each entry have separate sections for organiser's info and rider's info? The latter on the basis of "route from 200X" the former giving organisers the facility to upload / link to a route for the current year themselves. I wouldn't be surprised if there are quite a few organisers who create a route on a mapping site or have a GPX but don't have a means of publishing it.

That's not a bad idea ...
You may not all be aware that AUKweb has facilities for uploading GPX and map etc, but it is very limited. Hence most "e-literate" organisers use their own web-space.

[Mind you, this adds another layer of complexity to the infrastructure. How will you authenticate an "organiser"? ]

[phil d]

..... Does it need to be 'cleared' with AUK? .......

This is a very good point.  Technically the answer is probably "no", but I think we would be unwise to proceed down this road without at the very least the tacit approval of the AUK board.  I am mindful that there have been rumblings in the past concerning yACF getting a bit "ahead of itself" in matters audax, and we need to ensure that IF this idea were to get going it has the weight of AUK behind it.  Better still if it could be part of the AUK site.

It would be best if each event could be kicked off by the organiser concerned, with further input following from users.  Negative comment?  Would need careful moderating - such a site needs to remain broadly factual.

Also, it is worth remembering that sometimes such projects start full of enthusiasm and good intention, but quickly interest is lost.  Recall the facility put on the AUK site to plan Mesh Perms?  There is the opportunity for any AUK member to add info regarding both nodes and routes between the nodes.  A few went up quickly, but very little progress has been made since the early days.  I'm as guilty on this as most, as I put up some info about a few "local" nodes and routes, but nothing since.

One very positive thing from that project, though - it demonstrates the capacity to expand out the AUK site.  I imagine FF will be along to add his pearls of wisdom.

[saturn]

Cooperation and integration with AUK would be wonderful but I think relying on organisers to create the initial entry would be a mistake. There's a general reluctance to add anything to the workload of organisers and this could prove to be an unnecessary hurdle.  In any case, one of the most attractive benefits of this idea is the possibility of providing info on audaxes that have been less well publicised by the organiser.

There's nothing stopping anybody setting up (with or without AUK consent) a site for people to upload details of audaxes they've ridden and in the absence of anything else that might be enough to encourage others to enter these events in the future. If organisers wish to add a more official record of the next running of the event that's great but it's not essential.

[EdinburghFixed]

(re the last few posts)

This is why I haven't really gone anywhere with this yet.

At the end of the day I'm "merely" a rider, with a degree of technical expertise and some time to invest in setting up something if it would be useful. I feel a little uncomfortable both with doing anything as part of "official" AUK (meddling with the system!) or with doing something that might be perceived as "against" AUK.

Also, it is worth remembering that sometimes such projects start full of enthusiasm and good intention, but quickly interest is lost.

Yep, I'm aware of this and don't want to end up in a situation where I have a second full-time job updating an audax site!

My gut instinct as a next step was just going to be to register a domain and add it to the existing hosting package I have for my other projects, and proceed to some sort of mockup version based on what interested parties here thought would be useful.

I think a key objective has to be to create something where any number of volunteers (vetted or whatever) can update entries and so on, it doesn't depend on one sort of "webmaster" figure who needs to be on it 24/7.

[Chris S]

Set something up for the rides you do - and if it works out, invite other contributors as time goes by.

[saturn]

I just googled "open source wiki software" - sounds pretty much like setting up and administering an online forum in terms of server & knowledge requirements.

Providing there's a mechanism for moderating any unduly adverse comments about an AUL event or organiser and providing you link to rather than duplicate the AUK calendar I don't see how anything discussed here could be perceived to be against AUK. Indeed it all sounds very pro-AUK.

[Cyklisten]

How about a category on here? There is a "Rides (not Audax)" why not a subcategory of Audax & C***** - "Rides"?
Unless there is already a thread associated with a ride it is difficult to know where to place ride report (don't go there, Lancelot ) That way a good many other than the mainstream events can be represented and experiences passed on.

[Ivo]

50 individuals creating the same .gpx route from scratch from the routesheet for a 400, 600 or 1000 event is frankly ridiculous.

Besides, a GPS route/track created from a routesheet is bound to of less quality as a GPS track provided by the organiser. Especially if the track originates from the organisers' GPS and recorded while reccing the route.

[phil d]

50 individuals creating the same .gpx route from scratch from the routesheet for a 400, 600 or 1000 event is frankly ridiculous.

Besides, a GPS route/track created from a routesheet is bound to of less quality as a GPS track provided by the organiser. Especially if the track originates from the organisers' GPS and recorded while reccing the route.

Oh dear.  I think I'm about to become Mr Unpopular!  If we have organiser-created gpx files, why not signed routes?  And roving mechanics, and sag wagons.  Let's call it a sportive!

For me, the challenge of the route is a key part.  I feel that I'm slightly "cheating" by following my GPS, but at least I've spent some time working with the routesheet and a map to create my own gpx track.

I'm not wholly serious (and have had some wine with dinner) so please don't condemn me out of hand!

[Ivo]

50 individuals creating the same .gpx route from scratch from the routesheet for a 400, 600 or 1000 event is frankly ridiculous.

Besides, a GPS route/track created from a routesheet is bound to of less quality as a GPS track provided by the organiser. Especially if the track originates from the organisers' GPS and recorded while reccing the route.

Oh dear.  I think I'm about to become Mr Unpopular!  If we have organiser-created gpx files, why not signed routes?  And roving mechanics, and sag wagons.  Let's call it a sportive!

For me, the challenge of the route is a key part.  I feel that I'm slightly "cheating" by following my GPS, but at least I've spent some time working with the routesheet and a map to create my own gpx track.

I'm not wholly serious (and have had some wine with dinner) so please don't condemn me out of hand!

Let's take PBP
Signed Route, check
GPS Route provided by the organsier, check
mechanics albeith not roving, check
sag wagons, nope.
Getting quite close to it.
When I provide the GPS Track as organiser I know that the riders stick closer to the route. Most will simply download the track to their GPS. Hardly anyone will try to find a shortcut (especially those who know that at my events a shortcut means an extra hill). So, from an organisers viewpoint, I prefer to provide the GPS track. As an extra benefit it makes your rides more popular.

[toontra]

Oh dear.  I think I'm about to become Mr Unpopular!  If we have organiser-created gpx files, why not signed routes?  And roving mechanics, and sag wagons.  Let's call it a sportive!

Sportives don't use routesheets OR .gpx tracks.  They are fully signed routes, so your analogy isn't appropriate.

More importantly,  many riders use GPS units (and increasing), whatever you may think about their validity.  Are you really suggesting that AUK or organisers should go out of their way to hinder these people creating their routes?

For me it's similar to the cheque entry issue.  GPS use and online entry are the way of the (not too distant) future, if not the present.  Should AUK cling on to the "old" way of doing things until the bitter end, or acknowledge and accommodate the transition?

[AndyH]

..... Does it need to be 'cleared' with AUK? .......

This is a very good point.  Technically the answer is probably "no", but I think we would be unwise to proceed down this road without at the very least the tacit approval of the AUK board.  ...........edit............. - such a site needs to remain broadly factual.

I would agree with all of that, but be stronger on the "broadly factual", surely it should be factual full stop. Opinions can be adequately expressed here 

Better still if it could be part of the AUK site.

As I said, I am not an expert, but I would guess that when AUK started it did not have a web site, and that when it first had a web site online entry and payment was not possible. These things evolve, and could this be the next part of the evolution? I am new around here, but am pretty average (male, 48, more free time than I used to have etc...). If the AUK website had somewhere I could contribute GPX files etc. (similar to what we do here) I would do it gladly.

Please excuse me if I am wrong (Matt C particularly because you are obviously younger than me!), but I get the feeling that a lot of organisers are of the generation one up from mine. This is not meant in any way derogatory, but maybe their web skills, ownership of paypal accounts etc is not at the level of younger people. However they are putting back into the sport what they have got out over the years by organising events for the rest of us. I particularly recall the New Forest 160 and the Dorset Downs (which I did enter online, but not through the AUK website and not without a glitch). Excellent events that I would not hesitate to ride again, but basically done the good old fashioned way, and all the helpers / organisors looked about the same age as my parents. (As I drove towards the Dorset Downs I encountered the organiser's brother putting up info control signs  ) (obviously next year I will ride to the event) Apologies John if I am denegrating your IT skills. Apologies all as I have just realised what I have said, but I'll leave it and bear the consequenses 

As I understand things, a new organiser needs a mentor. What about if the older organisors had a younger IT mentor? I would be happy to process paypal payments for someone without a paypal account. This could be a way to pre mentor future organisers.

Also, it is worth remembering that sometimes such projects start full of enthusiasm and good intention, but quickly interest is lost.

Yes, good point. The quality of what results from this initiative and the ability of members to contribute without the need for a 24/7 webmaster would hopefully maintain and renew the enthusiasm.

One very positive thing from that project, though - it demonstrates the capacity to expand out the AUK site.  I imagine FF will be along to add his pearls of wisdom.

So could Ed Fixed's original idea gravitate towards some sort of AUK sanctioned expansion of the current site? The earlier "Audax Expansion" thread talked a lot about the web site, online entry and systems in general. Many (including myself) have expressed positive interest in contributing in some way.

Perhaps the ideas should be formalised and rides to York undertaken to present them formally.

[AndyH]

(and have had some wine with dinner)

Me Too. The ramblings of a drunken audaxer ............