GPX editor / route planner wish lists?

[Euan Uzami]

It's by no means perfect - you will almost certainly have to fiddle around with it a bit, like add, remove and move the points on the route (but you should be able to do that now) however it should at least have a stab at pointing out junctions.

I've had a good play around with it this morning.  Not sure I've discovered all the features yet, but I am most impressed so far.   This is now at a point where it definitely becomes the "weapon of choice" for the combined breadcrumb track and off-road "route" approach favoured by many AUKs with older Etrexes.
Do you plan to add in the options of OSM Cycle and OS Landranger map display(like on bikehike)?   That would make it well nigh perfect in my book.

Thanks , that's good to hear 

You haven't discovered all the features yet because they haven't all been written yet    (currently working on elevation)
but the ones that are there are all accessible via the right click menu.


Adding OSM cycle/OS landranger maps is more difficult because it effectively means almost completely rewriting it if those maps are to be interactive. However what might be easier is to do something similar to the split screen approach, and just have the split screen display the line on the map but not have it interactive.

[fuaran]

You can show OSM maps through the Google Maps API. See for example: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Google_Maps_Example

[Euan Uzami]

You can show OSM maps through the Google Maps API. See for example: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Google_Maps_Example

Oh excellent, thanks - yes, then Pete, eventually.

[Somnolent]

Having used the split screen of bikehike a lot (and it has many advantages) I think, on balance, I prefer the bigger single screen real estate of gpxeditor.  With OS and OSM "layers" that can be switched in and out at will (while still using the various Google routing protocols) it will be AUKtastic.

[Euan Uzami]

yeah, well if it really is as easy as fuaran's link suggests it could be doable quite soon, I might prioritise that above elevation as i'm quite curious about that method of just swapping out the tile provider.

[Euan Uzami]

I've put OSM on. Seems to just work  Seems very slow at the moment, but it might just be our internet what with the amount of bloody iphones, ipads, games consoles, kindles, smartphones, etc on the router all synching themselves every 5 seconds 

[PloddinPedro]

Ben - I stayed away for a while, waiting for you to polish it, but I've given in to temptation and had another go this evening.

I suspect I've not properly educated myself on how to use it but........ Using the "Draw Track" option and set to "Walking" I input the 7 controls (plus start/finish) of my regular 201km ride. This delivers 200km exactly in Google Maps and rides as 201.5km on my Garmin. But on your GPXEditor I get 219km around a course which differs markedly from my usual route and which visually, is very obviously not the shortest path.

Am I misunderstanding this, or expecting it to do something it's not actually designed to do? Or just doing something wrong?

[Euan Uzami]

Ben - I stayed away for a while, waiting for you to polish it, but I've given in to temptation and had another go this evening.

I suspect I've not properly educated myself on how to use it but........ Using the "Draw Track" option and set to "Walking" I input the 7 controls (plus start/finish) of my regular 201km ride. This delivers 200km exactly in Google Maps and rides as 201.5km on my Garmin. But on your GPXEditor I get 219km around a course which differs markedly from my usual route and which visually, is very obviously not the shortest path.

Am I misunderstanding this, or expecting it to do something it's not actually designed to do? Or just doing something wrong?

My guesses are, most likely first:
a) Where you actually clicked is a slightly different position from what google regards as the centre of the town when you create the route by inputting place names on 'get directions' on google maps
b) you had it on driving mode for some of the route, or there was possibly a bug that caused it to be actually on driving mode when it said it was on walking mode
c) there is some anomaly like a manual level crossing that google walking doesn't think you can get past when you can (more likely if combined with (a) )

(I am presuming the 219km is when you actually used gpxeditor t create it rather than just upload one created elsewhere)
so then:
Did you only click at the controls? And you had it on walking right from the start of when you created the track?
It's probably pretty easy for me to work out why it differed. I'll send you a pm so you can send me the file so I can take a look if you like.
You can re-route a segment if you like. Right click on any segment (you might have to choose 'stop drawing' first if you're in the middle of drawing a track) and choose 'reroute'. Move the mouse gently to where you want to reroute it through. When the line looks a better route, click the mouse (either button) and choose accept. If it goes haywire, click the mouse and choose 'cancel', and the track will go back to what it was like before you clicked reroute.

I'll get some guides up soon that will give you a step by step guide on how to use the features.
Thanks for persisting with it!

[Somnolent]

I've put OSM on. Seems to just work  Seems very slow at the moment, but it might just be our internet what with the amount of bloody iphones, ipads, games consoles, kindles, smartphones, etc on the router all synching themselves every 5 seconds 

Works fine for me.
I think there are different "renderings" of the OSM data.  Any chance it could use one that highlights designated cycle routes (like bikehike does) ?

[Somnolent]

And another couple of "wish list" item.

"hover" over a "via point" on a route and it would be good to see its name rather than clicking it to "rename" and finding the name was fine after all.

Option to export the numbers, names and comments of all the "via points" on a route to a CSV file.

[Euan Uzami]

And another couple of "wish list" item.

"hover" over a "via point" on a route and it would be good to see its name rather than clicking it to "rename" and finding the name was fine after all.

Option to export the numbers, names and comments of all the "via points" on a route to a CSV file.

yep, both easy. might get chance on sunday, failing that later next week.

Also don't get your hopes up too much but I think it's possible to enable bing as a tile provider, which means OS maps. 

[Toady]

When you switch between maps does it also use the displayed map for routing?  Or does it always use google road data for routing. 

I know I could check this by trying a route where there is a road missing from OSM, but I thought I'd be lazy and ask.

[Euan Uzami]

When you switch between maps does it also use the displayed map for routing?  Or does it always use google road data for routing. 

I know I could check this by trying a route where there is a road missing from OSM, but I thought I'd be lazy and ask.

no, it always uses google for routing.

get this, though - fairly spookily, streetview still works...

[Euan Uzami]

published a few updates today: http://blog.gpxeditor.co.uk/2013/01/default.aspx

[PloddinPedro]

It's looking better and better by the day Ben. Keep up the good work

[frankly frankie]

Yes indeed.  I'm looking forward to this bit -

I'll get some guides up soon that will give you a step by step guide on how to use the features.

'cos I seem to be missing something - in 'Track' mode everything works as expected, but when I try to draw in 'Route' mode all I can get is straight line point-to-point lines, regardless of what I select among the modes at the bottom, and regardless of whether I just click or right-click and use 'route to here'.
Win 7 and Firefox 12.

Still, I see from the blog that 'route generation from track' is an up-coming feature, so maybe I'll be able to get round it that way.

get this, though - fairly spookily, streetview still works...   [in OSM view]

 

[Euan Uzami]

Yes indeed.  I'm looking forward to this bit -

I'll get some guides up soon that will give you a step by step guide on how to use the features.

'cos I seem to be missing something - in 'Track' mode everything works as expected, but when I try to draw in 'Route' mode all I can get is straight line point-to-point lines, regardless of what I select among the modes at the bottom, and regardless of whether I just click or right-click and use 'route to here'.
Win 7 and Firefox 12.

Still, I see from the blog that 'route generation from track' is an up-coming feature, so maybe I'll be able to get round it that way.

yes, sorry, that's deliberate. I've taken the view that routes are meant to be sparse, with just a routepoint at each instruction, rather than to define the actual shape of the line.

I create a marker for each route point which you can individually give a name to.
The browser seems to grind to a halt when there are hundreds of these on the map. Try loading an existing gpx with a rte in it that has hundreds of rtepts, and see how responsive the browser is.

Is that a limitation do you think, do you need to create routes rather than tracks but with auto routing? If so how would you like to name all the (many) routepoints - just by number? If you do need that feature then I'm sure I can think of a way round it.

The 'create route from track' is already in there, it's accessed from the track's rectangular icon in the top right. The way it works is described in post #97.

[Somnolent]

..... but when I try to draw in 'Route' mode all I can get is straight line point-to-point lines, regardless of what I select among the modes at the bottom, and regardless of whether I just click or right-click and use 'route to here'.
Win 7 and Firefox 12.

I see the fact that it doesn't do its own "routing" as a definite advantage.
Seems to me (Ben, correct me if I'm wrong) that it lays down via points on any road junctions it finds on the track, and then shows them connected in direct mode routing.   
This corresponds to how I use my Vista HCx anyway (track on the road + crow flies route which I learned from these pages many moons ago). 
But if you take the route GPXEditor generates into Mapsource and ask it to recalculate, it does it according to whatever rules you have set up.   Presumably if you put in on a Garmin in "follow road" mode it would show the route followiing the road.

Edit: X-posted with Ben

[Euan Uzami]

I see the fact that it doesn't do its own "routing" as a definite advantage.
Seems to me (Ben, correct me if I'm wrong) that it lays down via points on any road junctions it finds on the track, and then shows them connected in direct mode routing.

that's a fairly kind description, but yes, essentially 

(being pedantic, it doesn't look along the track and find junctions, it asks for a NEW route going through a subset of the point of each segment, and then assembles a route from those - this caveat meaning that it's obviously entirely possible that it could get it wildly wrong - the route it creates should be regarded as just a starter which you should then check, and chop and change if necessary, but hopefully i've made it easy for that to be done.)

however I think what frankie was on about is the fact that it doesn't do auto-routing when drawing a route, only when drawing a track, which like I say is intentional just so you don't get a huge number of markers.

[frankly frankie]

Is that a limitation do you think, do you need to create routes rather than tracks but with auto routing?

No not a problem at all - I just misunderstood what was on offer.  After all, if I'm drawing a Route and then right-click - I'm offered options to continue the Route using a variety of different algorithms, driving, walking etc.  'Direct' Routes suits me fine, it's just an oddity that the other options seem to be there.

[Sergeant Pluck]

I like the sparse or as the crow flies routing.

How does the "save just this" work?

Is it possible to (assuming you save the route and the track separately) import both into Basecamp and then save the two as a combined GDB file but keeping the route part as a sparse route (avoiding recalculation by Basecamp)?

[Euan Uzami]

I like the sparse or as the crow flies routing.

How does the "save just this" work?

Save just this saves just the particular track to a GPX file, rather than all the *things* (routes, tracks and waypoints) that are currently loaded all into one GPX file.
So for example if you have three tracks, two routes and four waypoints loaded, and you click 'Save just this' on one of the tracks, then it will save just that track into its own GPX file, but not the other tracks, or the routes. (For convenience, it will give you the option to include the waypoints as well, or not.)

If you click save all, then it will save all three tracks, two routes and four waypoints into the one GPX file.

Is it possible to (assuming you save the route and the track separately) import both into Basecamp and then save the two as a combined GDB file but keeping the route part as a sparse route (avoiding recalculation by Basecamp)?

i don't know basecamp, only mapsource, but if you want a combined GDB file, it sounds like it might be easier to save them NON-separately, i.e. save all, then import the resulting single gpx containing both the track and the route into basecamp, then save it off as a GDB?
I know this works with mapsource, which doesn't recalculate a route when you load one from a GPX file. I don't know what causes basecamp to recalculate a route.

[Euan Uzami]

Is that a limitation do you think, do you need to create routes rather than tracks but with auto routing?

No not a problem at all - I just misunderstood what was on offer.  After all, if I'm drawing a Route and then right-click - I'm offered options to continue the Route using a variety of different algorithms, driving, walking etc.  'Direct' Routes suits me fine, it's just an oddity that the other options seem to be there.

Oh right I see what you mean - those options do present themselves on the menu which is why it's confusing, thanks for spotting that. 

Also I've noticed that the ad box obscures the hover-over panel, I'll fix that tonight hopefully.

[frankly frankie]

Is it possible to (assuming you save the route and the track separately) import both into Basecamp and then save the two as a combined GDB file but keeping the route part as a sparse route (avoiding recalculation by Basecamp)?

i don't know basecamp, only mapsource, but if you want a combined GDB file, it sounds like it might be easier to save them NON-separately, i.e. save all, then import the resulting single gpx containing both the track and the route into basecamp, then save it off as a GDB?
I know this works with mapsource, which doesn't recalculate a route when you load one from a GPX file. I don't know what causes basecamp to recalculate a route.

I don't know Basecamp either, but remember that ultimately whether a Route follows the road or not is down to what you choose in the GPS - regardless of whether it does or does not, in Basecamp or any other software.

[Toady]

I don't know Basecamp either, but remember that ultimately whether a Route follows the road or not is down to what you choose in the GPS - regardless of whether it does or does not, in Basecamp or any other software.

This is why, on Ben's wonderful site, routes (rather than tracks) would be lower on my priority list than tracks.

If I set up a route (with relatively few points) and then ask a piece of software to calculate roads-to-be-taken* between the route points for me, I want to be confident that this is the same as my GPS will give.  Using Garmin Mapsource with the same OSM data as in my Garmin GPS  I can have this confidence.

But if I create a set of routepoints on software using different map data, and a different routing engine to my GPS I don't have total confidence that my GPS isn't going to do something totally different, and maybe quite bonkers when navigating between the points (maybe it's missing a crucial road or something).

That's why, if I have  software and map data different to my GPS (as is the case here) then I'd prefer to create a track, not a route, and manually try to keep my current position on the line of that track, rather than wait for my GPS to bing me and tell me to turn left in 100 metres.

Does that make sense?

* trying hard not to use the word "route"