... the user friendly GPS tool


Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Routing options
#1
I usually need to plan a route with 'Avoid Motorway' and 'Avoid Tolls' checked, but sometimes I need to allow these to be used. Usually these settings then apply to the whole route, but the problem is that they might be different for a different route and currently it is an RC overall application preference. Is it not possible to be able to set this for a route and have it saved with the file so that each time it is opened the routing prefs as set for that file/route will be used and so can be different for each file that is opened?

I suspect the generic file formats used make this impossible, but would be good if there way a way to enable this.
Reply
#2
(14.06.2017, 08:34)UKenGB Wrote: Is it not possible to be able to set this for a route and have it saved with the file so that each time it is opened the routing prefs as set for that file/route will be used and so can be different for each file that is opened?

That's an interesting idea. Except for a few file formats none support the storage of routing options. Which file formats do you use?
--
Christian
Reply
#3
Well I tend to use GPX as the default and then export to whatever format is required once I have the route correct and how I want it. Usually that then means CoPilot TRP.

Perhaps you should create your own default RC format. It can be based on any other format you think is convenient, but extended to be able to store routing prefs for that file (they're just XML really anyway). Then we just export to any other format as we desire.

Actually, the ideal would be if we could specify waypoints and routing prefs between them. I often find I want e.g. to cover part of the route using motorways when available, but for the other parts of the route, absolutely avoid them. To be able to specify different prefs for different parts of the route would be brilliant. But I guess Google couldn't handle that. So ability to set these per file would be the next best thing.

Having said that, is there a faster way to convert e.g. 10 routes from one format to another? Some sort of batch mode? It's currently very clumsy, having to individually open each file and 'Save As' etc. The Open/Save dialog is also rather limiting so if you keep them in separate folders, each file conversion requires changing directories twice. The std. MacOS dialog usually lists recently used folders and that would be extremely useful. However, a batch mode would be fantastic. No need to query Google, just specify the files to convert and to what type and RC then simply saves them to the specified format. 10 files could be converted in this way in a matter of seconds.

Actually another feature that would speed this up is if we could click on a file and have it open in RC. So if .gpx was associated with RC, then double clicking on a .gpx file would open it in RC. This is of course the std. modus operandi of MacOS and others. I'm not sure why it has never worked in RC. Could this be fixed as that would definitely help.
Reply
#4
(19.06.2017, 09:41)UKenGB Wrote: Perhaps you should create your own default RC format.

I could define a GPX extension for the routing stuff.

(19.06.2017, 09:41)UKenGB Wrote: To be able to specify different prefs for different parts of the route would be brilliant. But I guess Google couldn't handle that.

The routing options can be specified with every call to the Google Directions API, but defining them in a UI that users understand is the problem.

(19.06.2017, 09:41)UKenGB Wrote: Having said that, is there a faster way to convert e.g. 10 routes from one format to another?

Did you try the command line version?

(19.06.2017, 09:41)UKenGB Wrote: Actually another feature that would speed this up is if we could click on a file and have it open in RC. So if .gpx was associated with RC, then double clicking on a .gpx file would open it in RC.

On Windows, this works fine since RouteConverter interprets each command line argument as a file to open.

(19.06.2017, 09:41)UKenGB Wrote: This is of course the std. modus operandi of MacOS and others. I'm not sure why it has never worked in RC.

Well, tell me how this works on Mac OS X from the dev perspective and I'll try to fix whatever is necessary. How does the finder communicate that to the (Java) app?
--
Christian
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)