Add element to and ?
I just updated the GPX website to include some new GPX programs and
websites, and I fixed the documentation to include <trkseg> and
correct some typos.
I've been using GPX in some larger mapping projects, and I have found
some things that I think should be included in GPX. We added a <type>
element to <wpt>, <rtept>, and <trkpt> to allow users to classify
point data for their specific applications. Example types:
"geocache", "intersection", "fire hydrant", "coffee shop".
I'd like to add a <type> element to <rte> and <trk> as well. Example
types: "highway", "unpaved road", "pipeline", "tracklog from Magellan
GPS", "saved track". Because it's a text field, users can store
anything they want there. I'd like to be able to pass my mountain
bike trails from ExpertGPS to Wissenbach Map and TopoFusion and other
GPX programs, and still be able to sort my tracks based on the type of
What do you think? Should we add <type> as an optional element to
<rte> and <trk>?
TopoGrafix - GPS Software, Waypoints, and Maps
http://www.topografix.com - mailto:egroups@...
- I changed the topic since <region> didn't really fit the discussion.
Personally, I thought XML was supposed to be both readable and parsable.
Normalization is fine and dandy for databases, but I would personally
prefer both a trk and rte data since I can quickly discern which is
which. It is well known by most users of GPS units, and most GPS
software has these options available. I vote to keep it as it is.
It seems to me that Trk data is sequential track data indicating an
exact defined path, while rte data is a list of sequential waypoints
that can be reached by x alternate paths. So, for example if you were
going from the Visitor's Center to the geyser, it would show you to take
the long path (trail 2), while a route would show you the visitor's
center as step one and geyser as step 2. True that all routes could be
tracks, but not all tracks are routes.