Interesting Google Earth "bugs"

[scribbly]

Whilst working on a recent project I found a couple of things that I "think" may not work exactly as intended...

1. "Track:" is added to the front of the position List regardless if it already has been prefixed with "Track:"
   
2. The description that forms part of the position list is not interpreted correctly.
   

So for example if the kml includes:

Code:

<Placemark>
  <name>Track: Section 9</name>
  <description><![CDATA[<div style="border:1px solid green;padding:10px;padding-top:0px;width:400px;border-radius:10px;">
    <h3><img src="http://mitupela.net/bushwalking.jpg" style="vertical-align:middle;"/> Canning to Monadnocks</h3>
    <a href="http://bit.ly/qoB2o1">Bibbulmun Track 2011</a> :: <a href="http://bit.ly/znvHcF">Day 6</a>
    <br/><br/>
    Photos: <a href="http://bit.ly/zAIGoC">Panoramas</a> | <a href="http://bit.ly/woY6cB">Flora</a> | <a href="http://bit.ly/xUqtcO">Fauna</a> | <a href="http://bit.ly/wKoY1l">The Track</a>
    <br/>
    GPS: <a href="http://bit.ly/yEu0bY">Google Earth Tracks</a> | <a href="http://bit.ly/yFxb3Z">SPOT Adventure Page</a>
    <br/><br/>
    <em>Generated by Christian Pesch's <a href="http://www.routeconverter.com">RouteConverter</a>.</em>
</div>]]></description>
  <styleUrl>#trackStyle0</styleUrl>
  <LineString>
    <coordinates>
    </coordinates>
  </LineString>

When opened in RC the Position List Name in RC includes the description as well as the name. And when it's saved, because of the 64 character limit in GoogleEarth it's truncated to "d06.kmz/Track: div>"

Now, I don't expect RC to manage the description node of kml files, but it would be nice if it handled them correctly: that is didn't mess with them

Is that possible??

[routeconverter]

[*]"Track:" is added to the front of the position List regardless if it already has been prefixed with "Track:"

That should not happen.

[*]The description that forms part of the position list is not interpreted correctly.

I don't understand what is wrong there. There is no "d06.kmz/Track: div>" in your example snippet?

Can you send me your example file or put it into this thead inside a ZIP archive? Then we're talking about the same data and it's easier for me to understand the problems in the code and fix them.

Is that possible??

I'll do my very best.

[scribbly]

[*]"Track:" is added to the front of the position List regardless if it already has been prefixed with "Track:"

That should not happen.

I didn't think so either, but if you look at 03 -> 04 you'll see something's happened.

[*]The description that forms part of the position list is not interpreted correctly.

I don't understand what is wrong there. There is no "d06.kmz/Track: div>" in your example snippet?

Can you send me your example file or put it into this thead inside a ZIP archive? Then we're talking about the same data and it's easier for me to understand the problems in the code and fix them.

Yes, sorry, I left the beginning off for brevity; it was the file name I think?

OK -- Attached:

1. Original from GE:
     d06-01.zip (Size: 11.79 KB / Downloads: 830)
   
2. Opened and Saved in RC (no edit):
     d06-02.zip (Size: 11.77 KB / Downloads: 848)
   
3. Track Name changed to "Day 6" and saved:
     d06-03.zip (Size: 11.76 KB / Downloads: 807)
   
4. 03 opened and saved (no edit):
     d06-04.zip (Size: 11.76 KB / Downloads: 822)
   

[kumo]

@scribbly

Which version of RouteConverter did you use? What about the latest Prerelease?

[scribbly]

Which version of RouteConverter did you use? What about the latest Prerelease?

Probably not, though I'm not at home to check at the moment.

Edit: 2.5 from 6 November 2011

[routeconverter]

Yes, sorry, I left the beginning off for brevity; it was the file name I think?

OK -- Attached:

1. Original from GE:
   
2. Opened and Saved in RC (no edit):
   
3. Track Name changed to "Day 6" and saved:
   
4. 03 opened and saved (no edit):
   

Please try the latest prerelease I've just uploaded: it won't add a Track or Route prefix if there is already one and it doesn't use the <description> as the name for a route. Is it closer to what you're expecting?

[scribbly]

Please try the latest prerelease I've just uploaded: it won't add a Track or Route prefix if there is already one and it doesn't use the <description> as the name for a route.

It sounds great... will give it a go when I get home

Is it closer to what you're expecting?

Well, to be honest, I'm not "expecting" anything: I'm hugely grateful for all your work and extremely happy to offer ideas, promote and donate to this excellent software: THANKS!!

[scribbly]

Please try the latest prerelease I've just uploaded: it won't add a Track or Route prefix if there is already one and it doesn't use the <description> as the name for a route. Is it closer to what you're expecting?

This is what I observe:

1. The <description> node is moved to the <Folder> from the original <Placemark> node
   
2. The original Folder / description was lost.
   
3. The original Placemark / description was contained in a CDATA block and not escaped.
   
4. Folder / name was changed from "Day 6" to the Placemark / name
   
5. The original Google generated kml uses namespace: .../kml/ext/2.2 where as you use .../kml/2.0
   
6. <Style> was changed
   

Some of that may because I'm not googleEarth saving in the same format version??

[routeconverter]

This is what I observe:

1. The <description> node is moved to the <Folder> from the original <Placemark> node
   
2. The original Folder / description was lost.
   
3. The original Placemark / description was contained in a CDATA block and not escaped.
   
4. Folder / name was changed from "Day 6" to the Placemark / name
   
5. The original Google generated kml uses namespace: .../kml/ext/2.2 where as you use .../kml/2.0
   
6. <Style> was changed
   

Some of that may because I'm not googleEarth saving in the same format version??

For the KML Namespace stuff I guess you're loading a KML 2.2 aka Google Earth 5 file and storing it as KML 2.0 aka Google Earth 3? Since the formats differ a lot, additional information in the file might be lost or displaced.

[scribbly]

I've got GE 6.1.0.5001, and as I said, I'm not sure what version of kml it's saving in as it doesn't give me an option (or am I missing something).

But you would be interpreting the kml and using the correct format? I understand that writing a kml v5 loading into RC and saving as a kml v3 would mean some things get lost.

I don't think RC should be a kml editor, so if this is getting too complex it's OK, I'll just ensure that I finish with RC before I edit in GE