[Loadstone] Routes and trips.

Shawn Kirkpatrick shawn at odyssey.cm.nu
Tue Oct 9 13:48:16 BST 2007


At first this system sounds like a good idea but unfortunately would be 
impossible to implement. This is because loadstone has no concept of 
streets, only points. We can actually get street line data for north america 
but the dataset is too big for the phone to process effectively. Getting 
this data for other countries is proving difficult to impossible. This means 
that even if you could figure out what street you're on, maybe from 
intercection crossings, there'd be no way of knowing how far along the 
street you are. Also, in an automatic track there's no way to know in 
advance how many points there'll be. If you go over 100 the percentage 
method breaks down. In automatic point naming there'd have to be a method of 
naming points so the user knows they're all related to the same route no 
matter where that route goes. I imagine the point names will be pretty 
generic, probably a number that gets incremented with each point. Nothing 
too complicated since they're just track markers and most of them would 
probably get discarded anyway.
I think the more important system to get working is the ordered checkpoints. 
Once that's in then adding the automatic tracking probably wouldn't be too 
hard since it would pretty much use the same logic.

On Tue, 9 Oct 2007, Cearbhall O Meadhra wrote:

> Dear Sean et al,
>
> I have been following this discussion with keen interest. I think some very
> good ideas are appearing.
>
> Ronan and I have put together a method of handling POI names when they occur
> on the same street. We simply add a percentage value to each point name as
> it progresses logically by longitude or latitude. A typical result would be:
> "main Street 0%", "main Street 10%", "main Street 20%", etc  up to "main
> Street 100%",.
>
> It is possible that this street is laid out in a circle and so this logical
> sequence might not be the sequence one would meet while walking from one end
> of the street to the other. In that case, I would recommend that the "%"
> value be separated from the rest of the point name as a numeric field that
> could be edited automatically as recommended in the suggestions below, to be
> rearranged according to the sequence in which they occur to the pedestrian.
> Of course this would mean that the system must know the increments of the
> percentage values so that the correct ones are maintained but I think that
> would be easy enough to manage.
>
> The value of using the percentage as an incremental identifier is that it
> allows a universal method that gives a sense of the location of the walker
> in relation to the beginning and end of the street while giving a unique ID
> to the point of interest.
>
> Any comments?
>
>
>
> All the best,
>
>
> Cearbhall
>
> "Good design enables - Bad design disables"
>
> Tel: 01-2864623 Mob: 087 9922227 Em: cearbhall.omeadhra at projectidd.ie
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: loadstone-bounces at loadstone-gps.com
> [mailto:loadstone-bounces at loadstone-gps.com] On Behalf Of Dave Mielke
> Sent: 09 October 2007 03:19
> To: loadstone at loadstone-gps.com
> Subject: Re: [Loadstone] Routes and trips.
>
> [quoted lines by Shawn Kirkpatrick on 2007/10/08 at 17:01 -0700]
>
>> They're a list stored in memory. This avoids having to do any lookups
>> using the database engine.
>
> i believe this is a good thing for features such as these. Here are some
> suggestions:
>
> I see a tracked or recorded trip and a user-defined route as being the same
> thing except for how the data is entered. In both cases one wants to end up
> with an ordered list of checkpoints. That's what loadstone already has. To
> make these features work, therefore, I think there are four features which
> need to be added.
>
> First: Regardless of how the data is entered, both features need the
> currently loaded checkpoint list to be editable. This means that there needs
> to be a way to bring up the list of checkpoints, and for each item to have
> options like rename, move (up or down within the list), delete, "go to" (see
> second feature) to select the next point, and "explore" (see fourth feature)
> to find out what's near by. The "explore" function would probably be more
> useful if it only considered unchecked points, i.e. points not on the route.
>
> Second: Regardless of how the data is entered, there needs to be a way to
> activate the currently loaded checkpoint list as a rrute. By default, the
> next checkpoint to go to would be the first one in the list, although the
> user could use the "go to" function (see first feature) to tell loadstone
> where he actually is on the route. Loadstone would only monitor the next
> checkpoint (the selected item) until the user gets there, at which time it'd
> to an implicit "go to" to the next item in the list. It could even warn the
> user if he's moving away from the point.
>
> Third: Defining a route is probably as simple as adding a point to the end
> of the currently loaded checkpoint list whenever it's checked. That's
> probably already the way it's done. A useful enhancement, though, would be
> the ability to check a point while it's being defined. Adding this to the
> save point submenu would be convenient.
>
> Fourth: For recording a trip it needs to be possible to both automatically
> and manually add points. Automatic points clearly need to be added each time
> the user changes direction, but should probably also be added at a regular
> time interval even if the user doesn't change direction. The name for an
> automatically added point should begin with the word "auto", and include the
> time it was added as well as the direction in which the user was moving (the
> new direction if a change). This information, in conjuction with the
> "explore"
> option (see first feature) will help the user later when he goes through the
> points to give them more meaningful names. A manually added point should
> have a similar default name except that it should begin with "user" rather
> than "auto", but should also allow the user to immediately assign a more
> meaningful name.
>
> That's my initial proposal in order to get some discussion going.
>
> -- 
> Dave Mielke           | 2213 Fox Crescent | I believe that the Bible is the
> Phone: 1-613-726-0014 | Ottawa, Ontario   | Word of God. Please contact me
> EMail: dave at mielke.cc | Canada  K2A 1H7   | if you're concerned about Hell.
> http://FamilyRadio.com/                   | http://Mielke.cc/bible/
> _______________________________________________
> Loadstone mailing list
> Loadstone at loadstone-gps.com
> http://www.loadstone-gps.com/mailman/listinfo/loadstone
>
> _______________________________________________
> Loadstone mailing list
> Loadstone at loadstone-gps.com
> http://www.loadstone-gps.com/mailman/listinfo/loadstone
>


More information about the Loadstone mailing list