[Loadstone] Checkpoints strategy suggestion

Grzegorz Zlotowicz grzezlo at wp.pl
Sun Aug 9 13:57:23 BST 2009

I know the lock point function, but it lacks the goto next or prev on the 
checkpoints list...
/The route mode sounds exciting, but the automation fraightens me a bit, I 
mean - please don't forget about manual mode too...
By the way could you write some more about this planned feature?
Greetings, Greg.
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Shawn Kirkpatrick" <shawn at loadstone-gps.com>
To: <loadstone at loadstone-gps.com>
Sent: Sunday, August 09, 2009 11:03 AM
Subject: Re: [Loadstone] Checkpoints strategy suggestion

> What you propose sounds a bit like the route mode we want to implement. 
> The route mode would use an ordered checkpoint list but figure out as much 
> as possible automatically without the user having to tell it which way in 
> the route they're going.
> At the moment you can monitor a specific point by using the lock point 
> function. Not quite checkpoint monitoring but close.
> On Sun, 9 Aug 2009, Grzegorz Zlotowicz wrote:
>> Hello,
>> the checkpoints subject is often discussed on the list, but as far as I 
>> know, the strategy i would like to suggest wasn't discussed yet...
>> I know that the current checkpoints monitoring strategy can be useful for 
>> many users, but personally i haven't very good experiences with it - when 
>> more than one checkpoint is marked, I often got erroneous directions not 
>> to the point on my way, but to some other - I think it is the result of 
>> the gps position drift...
>> Many times I also get the beginning of the checkpoint announce, and 
>> then - even before the distance and direction - other checkpoint, then 
>> again the first one and so on, so personally at the moment i'm using one 
>> cp at the time, selecting it manually or loading from file, but it isn't 
>> very comfortable...
>> Strategy i'd like to disscuss is as follows:
>> 1. In the default mode checkpoints monitoring would behave as usual, 
>> monitoring all checkpoint at once...
>> 2. Function next checkpoint and prev checkpoint would switch this 
>> monitoring to the next or previous checkpoint - the order of points would 
>> be incherited from the file where they're saved, or from the order user 
>> checks one after an other...
>> 3. I imagine, that in the program would be variable called for example 
>> checkpointnum, which by default would have value 0, meaning that all the 
>> points should be monitored as it's now.
>> 4. When user call next checkpoint function, the value of this variable 
>> would be increased by 1, pointing after first usage to the 1st checkpoint 
>> on the list.
>> 5. When user calls prev checkpoint, value of checkpointnum is decreased 
>> by 1, or if less than 1 - set to the last point in the checkpoints array.
>> 6. When checkpointnum is non0, the program monitors only the checkpoint 
>> having this number in the array, ignoring all other.
>> In this case, pressing key 5 in the nav mode would always give distance 
>> and direction to this point, even when user isn't actually moving, or 
>> Loadstone thinks so...
>> 7. There could also be optional setting, if aproaching the monitored 
>> checkpoints advances the checkpointnum - if it's 0 nothing happens of 
>> course, but if non0, autoadvance is on and user approached monitored 
>> checkpoint, program would increase or decrease the checkpointnum - 
>> remembering what was last used command, i mean depending on if prev 
>> checkpoint, or next checkpoint...
>> If we imagine, that the checkpoint list contains ordered points on the 
>> user way, such autoadvance would let him automatically track next 
>> interesting point on the way depending on if user is going the way from 
>> beginning to end or returning from end to the beginning...
>> One prerequisite is of course, that all points in the list are in the 
>> correct order, which as i think is the case in most listings, but if they 
>> aren't - nothing happens, simply user doesn't uses this feature using 
>> instead the automagical program monitoring...
>> I hope, that the implementation of such functionality would simplify the 
>> loadstone usage in many cases for the beginners and advanced users, and 
>> isn't as i imagine very hard and time consuming to implement...
>> I'd like to hear from you what do you think about such solution?
>> Of course in the above explanation i omitted some minor details, such as 
>> that if the checkpointnum is 1, user presses prev checkpoint, the program 
>> returns to the default all-monitoring mode...
>> Also the message "next checkpoint is..." or "previous checkpoint is..." 
>> or - "last checkpoint is..." after calling the prev/next checkpoint 
>> function, seems rather obwious, letting user know when he is at the last 
>> checkpoint on the way, but as i said, these are rather minor details...
>> Thanks for your time,
>> greetings, Greg.
> _______________________________________________
> Loadstone mailing list
> Loadstone at loadstone-gps.com
> http://www.loadstone-gps.com/mailman/listinfo/loadstone

More information about the Loadstone mailing list