Yet Another Cycling Forum
General Category => Audax => Topic started by: AndyH on 15 December, 2010, 12:54:33 pm
-
I hope this is the right place to post this one, but relates to AUK site so decided to put it here.
If I create a route in bikehike to upload to the event page on the AUK site what is the best format to save it in - gpx route or gpx track?
As I use a Garmin 305 I generally use the tcx format hence am unsure. Thanks for a hopefully simple 1 word answer !
-
either
-
But do make sure you don't upload a route with several thousand way points because that's just annoying.
My take is that 'routes' are only useful if they have meaningful and labelled way points. Unless you are offering such a beast, the simplest option is to upload a track and let those who prefer routes to cut their own.
-
If it's a track you may find you need to zip it - the uploader will only accept smallish files.
-
Is it not also the case that, with etrex at least, you need to reduce the number of trackpoints to less than 500 to avoid truncation when the file is uploaded to the riders unit?
-
See other posts in the last day or so re West Bay 200...
I may be wrong, but possibly the advice above should have been to upload as a 'gpx route'.
For a Garmin 705 a 'route' works and a recent draft West Bay route was only 303 kb
Hope that is useful
M
-
Actually the file I uploaded is a GPX route created on bikehike with the number of points reduced to 500. Seemed to satisfy the previously discussed criteria re etrex / file size etc.
-
Actually the file I uploaded is a GPX route created on bikehike with the number of points reduced to 500. Seemed to satisfy the previously discussed criteria re etrex / file size etc.
Not really. Defacto, the Garmin 705 GPS has no routepoint limits. The much loved and widely used eTrex series does. See FF's notes on eTrex limits here (http://www.aukadia.net/gps/lwg_1.htm). The 'lowest common denominator' is a GPX with a <500 point track, or several <500 point tracks as appropriate.
It's also useful to add Waypoints marking the location of controls. Aside from positively identifying the location of the controls on the GPS map, they can be selected as 'follow road' destinations or used as the basis of a 'follow road' route by those who like that sort of thing.
Edit: The WestBay GPX contains a route with 498 trackpoints. Loading the route onto my eTrex Vista Cx using Mapsource gives a Route Truncated error; the route is truncated at routepoint249. YHPM
-
Bit of mixed terminology I think.
eTrex limits are 500 points per track, 250 waypoints per route, or 50 waypoints per auto-routing route.
If this file is a route then you've just fell foul of the 250 waypoints limit.
Preferences differ as to what is the best way to do a GPX file. IMO (and many others) it's best to stick to tracks though. Everyone has their own preferences as to how they like their routes, so anything you provide is unlikely to satisfy everyone. A track is the e equivalent of running a highlighter over the map and can be useful even if you haven't got a GPS.
I do my GPX downloads as a tracklog, split into separate tracks for each stage of the event, and filtered down to 500 points each, which is plenty of resolution for a typical Audax leg of 50-80k. Then add waypoints to mark Start, Finish and Control locations.
-
Bit of mixed terminology I think.
I think it's obligatory for any GPS discussion.
-
The upload file size limit is about 200Kb (or was last time I looked) and many 'generated' GPX files will come out considerably larger than this - it's a very inefficient format in terms of file sizes. But they will zip down to about 20% - so an original file of 1Mb should zip down to an uploadable size.
Zipping has the advantage too, that you don't get the problem (as in the referenced West Bay thread) that someone just clicks on the link and gets a screenful of xml code. Also, you can package more than one file, or a file and a 'read_me', into one zip.
+1 to UNDulates' post, BTW.
-
IMO (and many others) it's best to stick to tracks though. Everyone has their own preferences as to how they like their routes, so anything you provide is unlikely to satisfy everyone. A track is the e equivalent of running a highlighter over the map and can be useful even if you haven't got a GPS.
My sentiments exactly.
I do my GPX downloads as a tracklog, split into separate tracks for each stage of the event, and filtered down to 500 points each, which is plenty of resolution for a typical Audax leg of 50-80k. Then add waypoints to mark Start, Finish and Control locations.
Creating a track on Bikehike you can get perfectly adequate resolution for a 200km within the 500 trackpoint limit. I don't see the need for separate tracks except in a couple of special cases:
- A complex route with lots of loops originating from same point.
An out & back where outward & inward are almost but not quite same.
-
I do my GPX downloads as a tracklog, split into separate tracks for each stage of the event, and filtered down to 500 points each, which is plenty of resolution for a typical Audax leg of 50-80k. Then add waypoints to mark Start, Finish and Control locations.
Given the large established user-base of Etrex users, this seems to be the best approach at present, IMHO.
-
I don't have a gps unit. On my 400km event I supply two .gpx files. The first one out to Chepstow is 238km and 2793 trkpt, file size is 350KB. The return is 169km and 1521 trkpt, 120KB. These files were made using bikehike, bikely, bikeroute toaster and by editing the xml gpx files by hand. They include elevation data but nothing else
The files as supplied load into google maps and display just fine on my Android phone. I've used the Android phone for route checking
-
::-) Sorry about this.
As you can tell I don't really know much about the whole gpx subject, I don't know the difference between a route and a track*, hence the simplistic OP.
I use a Garmin 305 and it doesn't really seem to care - I put a gpx into bikehike, fiddle with it to add what I want (turns in the dark, controls etc), download it as a TCX file, put it into the device as a garmin course, then follow the breadcrumb trail. It's incredibly simple and I haven't really looked at a routesheet all year. It beeps when I leave the course or when I get to a course point, at night I can make it light up at turns, but it doesn't have any intelligence or routing capability. I assume I'm in proprietary Garmin land here, but it works for me.
Anyway, back to the point. Manotea has kindly offered to turn the routesheet into something that should work, Paul D is also doing his own and he is an etrex user, so we should arrive at something suitable. My original bikehike files were bigger than the AUK 200 Kbyte limit, which is why I thought it was a good idea to reduce the number of points in the first place. If anyone would like one of my originals (which should hopefully load into bikehike or something similar to customize) then PM me.
*at risk of this coming out all wrong, I don't really want to know either, I have a solution that works for me, I'd just like to provide riders with a "vanilla" file that they can customise to their own preferences
-
At some point it will be interesting to do some sort of a survey to see just what models of GPS are the ones actually being used by randonneurs. Just wandering round the start of a big event with a clipboard would be one way to do it. Just from memory/guesswork I suspect the Edge types are now at least as common as the Etrexes.
Because the Etrex C models are justifiably popular, but they are now out on a limb compared with most other Garmin models, in terms of their capabilities and strengths. Also they are scheduled to be replaced in Garmin's lineup before the end of the year - obviously a lot will remain in use for several years to come, but at some point it would be reasonable for organisers to 'assume' the newer types in use (Edge, Dakota, Oregon, new Etrex) which will all have much more in common, in terms of the way they work. Then maybe we could formulate more meaningful advice for uploading Orgs.
-
Then maybe we could formulate more meaningful advice for uploading Orgs.
That would be fantastic; a digital El Supremo popping up on your GPS with a countdown to the tea stop :)
-
Very good, MV ;D
As a Legend HCx user I am subject to the trackpoint and waypoint limits. I find that loading a provided GPX into either Mapsource or Memory Map and reducing to sub 500 points always gives me a usable track (certainly worked with Manotea's track for the Ditchling Devil). Everyone with a Garmin presumably has a copy of Mapsource. While the mapping is pretty dire, the trackpoint reduction seems to work fine.
I prefer to do it on Memory Map, because that gives me the additional option of overlaying (on the screen and then saving separately) a route arranged in the way I like it. I then have the choice of using the track or the route, or both.
What I suppose I'm saying is that I don't think there is a need for organisers to worry about the number of trackpoints in their GPX file - it's up to the users to deal with it according to their needs.
-
What I suppose I'm saying is that I don't think there is a need for organisers to worry about the number of trackpoints in their GPX file - it's up to the users to deal with it according to their needs.
:) This is what I had hoped
-
That's what I do: a simple, unmodified track for the rider to work as it suits.
-
I prefer to do it on Memory Map, because that gives me the additional option of overlaying (on the screen and then saving separately) a route arranged in the way I like it. I then have the choice of using the track or the route, or both.
You can do the same thing in Mapsource, create a track, waypoints and route. The track and waypoints always show on the display. The route only shows up if you 'navigate' it. A good tip is to set the route color to white and transparent so you effectively follow teh track but get the follow road prompts.
What I suppose I'm saying is that I don't think there is a need for organisers to worry about the number of trackpoints in their GPX file - it's up to the users to deal with it according to their needs.
For what its worth I prefer the original track which I split into 500point chunks so that the track follows the road closely, but it's really not a big deal.
-
Then maybe we could formulate more meaningful advice for uploading Orgs.
That would be fantastic; a digital El Supremo popping up on your GPS with a countdown to the tea stop :)
A virtual cup of tea isn't worth the cup it's poured into.
-
I prefer to do it on Memory Map, because that gives me the additional option of overlaying (on the screen and then saving separately) a route arranged in the way I like it. I then have the choice of using the track or the route, or both.
You can do the same thing in Mapsource, create a track, waypoints and route. The track and waypoints always show on the display. The route only shows up if you 'navigate' it. A good tip is to set the route color to white and transparent so you effectively follow teh track but get the follow road prompts.
I don't doubt that's correct. It's just that the mapping in Mapsource is so useless (at least, the version I have), and I like to control the production of the routepoints which the OS1:50000 on Memory Map gives me. It also helps me to visualise the route I will be riding.
-
Is it not also the case that, with etrex at least, you need to reduce the number of trackpoints to less than 500 to avoid truncation when the file is uploaded to the riders unit?
No.
Etrexes require < 501 trackpoinst per track but will happily take >1 tracks per gpx. Mapsource will load them (by the time it's in Mapsource it's not gpx but you know what I mean), GPSBabel will not since it appears to load the points and let the GPS make them into a track.
-
What I suppose I'm saying is that I don't think there is a need for organisers to worry about the number of trackpoints in their GPX file - it's up to the users to deal with it according to their needs.
+1 to this,
but alongside it needs to be a general understanding that users need to review and, if necessary, fettle the information they download. Too many people assume that they are getting a 'prepared' file.