Re: [gpsxml] Extending the public definition of GPX
- View SourceHi there
It's been a while but I definitely haven't lost my interest in GPX.
>Here are the real questions I have. Answers that start with "Yes" orSorry but I have chosen to forget about the "Yes" and "No" stuff at each
>"No" are appreciated.
question and instead tell what I think :-)
>Should we extend the public definition of GPX to include related setsIn principle I like the idea of extending the GPX with related information
like Map calibration and definitely real time positioning information.
I am no expert into XML but maybe you could help me (and others) a little
by showing an example for each "information type".
One thing I like about GPX 1.0 tough is that it is simple to implement if
you just need to for instance read a waypoint list or a track.
To the extent possible I believe we should try to maintain this simplicity
for those who only need the data sets available in 1.0 and therefore I like
the idea of different vocabularies (one basic that represents 1.0, one for
map calibration info and one for real time positioning info).
Bottom line is "yes" but I would like to see some examples written by those
of you who knows more about XML than I do :-)
N 55° 22' E 10° 24'