Zumo User Forums

Glad you have unlinked the synching.

Javelin16 wrote: ↑Sun Jan 21, 2024 3:28 pm
But what surprised me the most is that I'm quite sure that I tested my test route on the XT2 after sync with the Tread and that the shaping points were modified. After the deletion of the route in explore through Tread and after several sync, the route was still on the XT2 and when I open it, the initial shaping points were restored in the file (or it is another file that opens...). And it remains like that for a while (no more sync that could alter the file, even if the route is not in the explore db in Tread). If I had reimported the route on the XT2 without taking notice, I would expect then from a consistent behaviour of the process that at least it should then be synced with the explore db in Tread and be modified again on the XT2 as before. But it remains with the correct shaping points on the XT2 for several days and it did not reappear in explore...

Of course if the link between the XT2 and Tread is cut, the route imported remains with correct shaping points on the XT2 (By the way, the names of the shaping points on the XT2 remain exactly the same as in Basecamp in that case, not like what jfheath is describing for the XT. So, a good progress if that damned sync with explore in Tread could be avoided with Tread active)

Quick question about your last paragraph. You say the shaping point names do not get altered by the XT2 when they are transferred from Basecamp.

That isn't quite what happens with the XT.

in the XT, any point that has been created as a Waypoint in Basecamp will never have its name changed. A waypoint is a point that has been created using the Basecamp waypoint / flag tool. Waypoints will show up in the lower left pane in Basecamp, along with the route and track. Waypoints will also show up in 'Favourites' or 'Saved' on the XT. Waypoints can then be used in a route as eithe shaping points or via points. Either. But it has to be one or the other. They never (so far) have had their name changed.

Any point that has not first been created as a Waypoint usually has its name changed - regardless of whether it is a via or a shaping point.

The tell tale sign is that often, the changed route point does not show its lat/long values in the trip planner / route planner app. Instead it often displays a town name and a county code ( eg Kendal, CMA).

Waypoints that are made in the Explore App (and I assume also the Tread App), are properly formatted Waypoints - like the Basecamp waypoints created with the flag tool)

I'm wondering whether Garmin have actually fixed this issue on the XT2, or since you had assumed that the issue related only to shaping points, there has been a misunderstanding ? I would be delighted to know that they have actually corrected that issue - I reported it to them over 2 years ago.


---------------------


Re the synching - is the synching time related, and or ownership related, do you think.

time related. Eg you put data onto the tread app. By the time you get to use it on the XT2, there has been plenty of opportunity for the synch process to say, - oh its not on the XT2, it must have been deleted, and get rid of it.

That would be ridiculous. It has to know where an object was created to avoid this student programming error. I think it will also need to know in which direction each item was synched. I suspect that only when a new item has been updated on both devices will it start to look at synching items that have been deleted from one. I suspect a semaphore system may be used. Items are flagged for deletion or for addition, but nothing actually happens until the same item in the same state appears in both places.

What I am suggesting is that it may take a couple of synchs to make sure that all data is appearing as it should in both places.
But it does mean that if you delete an item from one, it will disappear from the other in one or two synchs.

Maybe this is why they started to use collections. To be effective, you need both places to store everything. If you delete something in one place, it deletes it eventually from the other place. So instead of deleting items, you can make them invisible or irrelevant. Put items into collections and you can focus your selection of points, routes, tracks by accessing just one collection.

I dont need an answer - i was just thinking out loud. I decided a long time ago that Explore has nothing that I want to use.

What I really want to find out is whether the XT2 displays the RUT behaviour.

jfheath wrote: ↑Thu Jan 25, 2024 6:22 am Quick question about your last paragraph. You say the shaping point names do not get altered by the XT2 when they are transferred from Basecamp.

In fact this is a copy of the shaping points on the imported route on the XT2: It can be compared with the corresponding shaping points in Basecamp: As you can see the names are identical.
After sync with explore in Tread, this is no more the case. The names are changed and the gps coordinates are no more included: So, it seems for me that it is explore that changes the name of the shaping points.

I can also confirm that recalculation of the route on the XT2 will not alter those shaping points (names as well as position) (provided the sync with explore is desactivated!).

In this example, the shaping points in Basecamp where defined as explained previously (waypoints defined in BC, route through the waypoints that are becoming via points for the route, conversion of the via points in shaping points by using the "won't alert" option for those points).
If interested, I can also check if shaping points of the route defined directly without using first waypoints, are also not altered when imported on the XT2.

Test done. Via points and shaping points defined directly in Basecamp with the "new route" tool, without going through waypoints first.

After transfer to the XT2, the names of the via points are unaltered but the names of the shaping points are completely changed again. The order number is lost, the street number is completed with city and province name, the street number and the gps coordinates are lost.

After recalculation on the XT2, no more changes to the via and shaping points.

If I understood well the behaviour you described above on the XT, the via points are also altered in such a case on the XT? This is no more the case on the XT2. The name of the via points are unaltered.

So jfheath, it seems that we still have to stick to your trick with the waypoints on the XT2 too if we want to keep the names of the shaping points...

Many thanks for that information @Javelin16 . That is much appreciated.

So on the XT

The names of points first created and saved as Waypoints are never altered. Via and Shaping

Points created using the route tool or the insert tool :

• Via point names are often altered
• Shaping points names are often altered

For the XT2

The names of points first created and saved as Waypoints are never altered. Via and Shaping

Points created using the route tool or the insert tool :

• Via point names are never altered
• Shaping point names are often altered

In both cases, it appears that if the name is altered then the position is altered as well.

By 'often altered' I mean more often than not. I would estimate more than 75% of the time. I cannot find out why sometimes the name is not altered - although I haven't tried too hard !!!!

jfheath wrote: ↑Fri Jan 26, 2024 5:40 am For the XT2

The names of points first created and saved as Waypoints are never altered. Via and Shaping

On the XT2, if the link with the explore db is active, the shaping points are also modified (name and position) after sync, even if first created and saved as Waypoints in BC.(For the via points, I don't know because in my previous testing with the link to explore db active, my route did not include viapoints. Difficult for me to retest with via points included since I desactivated the link with explore...

jfheath wrote: ↑Fri Jan 26, 2024 5:40 am Points created using the route tool or the insert tool :

• Via point names are never altered
• Shaping point names are often altered

In both cases, it appears that if the name is altered then the position is altered as well.

On the XT2, if the link with the explore db is not enabled, the names of the shaping points created using the route tool or the insert tool in BC are modified but not their position as far as I can see on the map.

Another interesting finding. If the via points and the shaping points of the route are created using the route planner MRA (without going through the waypoints procedure), saved in MRA as gpx1.1 and corresponding gpx file copied through Win explorer on the XT2, the names and positions of via and shaping points are not altered! (order numbers kept, names not modified and GPS coordinates kept for via as well as for shaping points). This provided the link of the XT2 with the explore db is not enabled. This is valid after import and also after route recalculation on the XT2.Great!

Javelin16 wrote: ↑Fri Jan 26, 2024 12:29 pm Another interesting finding. If the via points and the shaping points of the route are created using the route planner MRA (without going through the waypoints procedure), saved in MRA as gpx1.1 and corresponding gpx file copied through Win explorer on the XT2, the names and positions of via and shaping points are not altered! (order numbers kept, names not modified and GPS coordinates kept for via as well as for shaping points)

That is consistent with the XT - @FrankB also discovered this and the relationship with the default subclass entry that is associated with each defined point. MRA uses the default subclass value (consisting of 0's and F's). I had also noticed that names weren't changed with MRA routes and had attributed it to the default subclass.

However, I have had a couple of times when this has not been the case and my initial attempts to change all subclass entries to the default were not 100% successful. I think Frank had much better success, and I got diverted with pinning down precisely what was going on with what I named the RUT behaviour and didn't go back to it.

Frank mentioned this again in a post a couple of weeks ago, and it reminded me that in my head, I hadn't yet convinced myself - but I'm sure that Frank is correct - he delved into it much deeper than me.

I know that it was one of the things that convinced me to buy MRA Gold lifetime. But there are two things that put me off using it a great deal.

1. The route that contains the plot of the route - using the gpxx extensions (ghost points) does not contain shaping points - they are scrubbed out.
2. Waypoints cannot be defined in MRA so that they transfer to the Zumo Favourites.

Accepting these limitiations would force me into a direction that I don't want to go. ie having to turn of auto recalc, or being forced to calculate the route on transfer. Not being able to store my own locations in the zumo favourites.

But @Stu uses it a lot and likes it. I'm just awkward !!

jfheath wrote: ↑Fri Jan 26, 2024 12:51 pm But there are two things that put me off using it a great deal.

1. The route that contains the plot of the route - using the gpxx extensions (ghost points) does not contain shaping points - they are scrubbed out.
2. Waypoints cannot be defined in MRA so that they transfer to the Zumo Favourites.

What do you mean by "does not contain shaping points"? In my test, on the XT2 the imported route contains the shaping points (small blue circles) and the via points (yellow flags), exactly as defined in MRA. Same when I list on the XT2 all the "locations" of the route, in the XT2 route editor.
Here is some additional infos obtained from MRA support on this topic a few weeks ago. MRA support wrote :

"If you also want to have the formation points, then it must use the gpx 1.1.
The gpx 1.2 file is a route track with via points, the route is calculated in the zumo based on the route track and places the via points."

May be this statement clarifies the point? Since this info was made available by MRA support, I use only gpx1.1 files from MRA (using the option "save as gpx1.1 " in MRA and not the "Export" option...)

What do you mean by "Waypoints cannot be defined in MRA so that they transfer to the Zumo Favorites" ? On the XT2, I found two ways to go to "Favorites": in "go to", there is the option "Waypoints" available and in the option explore, the option Waypoints is also available. In the gpx1.1 on MRA, POI, track and route are included. Garmin Waypoints equivalent in MRA are POI. If I define a POI in MRA, and provided I attach the POI to the route as a POI (using the + symbol in the edit panel of the POI in MRA which leads to two options, one beeing "as POI" ), it is treated as a Garmin Waypoint when the gpx file is imported on the XT2 and it is included in the Waypoints library (exactly in the same manner as the Basecamp Waypoints). I took me some times to realize that the POIs needed to be added to the route explicitely and as described above. Otherwise in effect, there are not part of the saved gpx by MRA. Do I miss other Garmin Waypoints characteristics?

I continue to invest a little bit on the MRA/XT2 connection because I fear that in some time the compatibility of the XT2 with BC could be jeopardized by some "fuzzy logic" of the Garmin software engineers! Also, if needed, I can use the MRA route planner on my ipad or phone if on the road without PC access. And finally, the MRA navigation app on the phone can play the role of a back up navigation device if something wrong happens to the XT2...

app.php/ZXT-P72c

I think you have taken my comments out if context. I was giving the reasons why it doesn't suit the way that I want to use the Zumo. I don't think that there is any disagreement.

MRA's gpx v1.2 contains a plot of the route that was created using the gpxx route point extensions. That means that the Zumo does not have to recalculate it. There are hundreds/thousands of these point sometimes only a few metres apart, depending on how straight or twisty the road is. From your quote, they seem to call it a track - which is a little confusing. But the track that BC and MRA creates actually uses exactly the same coordinates.

V1.2 does not contain any shaping points, it only contains via points - at least thats what I recorded when I wrote the pages in the link above, and I checked it out a couple of weeks ago. This means that if the route is recalculated by the Zumo, then it only has the via points to work with.

v1.1 has both via and shaping points, but the 'plot' of the route is not transferred, the zumo has to calculate it.
I assume that by 'formation points' the reply was referring to the shaping and via points. I hope so, because it certainly doesn't containg the thousands of gpxx route point extensions that provide the dot to dot plot of the route itself.

Both formats can be selected to include a track.

Regarding the waypoints. I was talking about points that I might want to create as Waypoints. I contacted MRA. Their comment was to the effect - Why would you want to do that ?
The answer is simple, although I didn't reply to what I considered a rhetorical dismissal of my question .

I use Waypoints for a number of reasons - one of which is to plot exactly where I will be parking the bike. A few hotels spring to mind where the car park entrance is just around the corner - but the one way system makes it a trip around the block. Or I might be meeting some friends at a particular location. I want that place in my favourites.

I could not do it on MRA - you can add a Poi from their database and It seems to allow that to be added to the route and it will transfer to the Zumo as a Waypoint. You cannot add your own poi to the route and have it appear in favourites. Thats what I discovered and what they subsequently told me.

Unless they have changed it since I asked a couple of weeks ago. But I'll check out the method that you used. I couldn't find a way to do it, and they said it wasn't possible. But there may have been a misuderstanding.

Be aware that my analysis is far from having the depth of yours.
My comments are only based on first use trials and of course corresponding findings can be incomplete or wrong in some ways…
I will check if the POIs I transferred in my testing include only existing MRA POI or not.

Javelin16 wrote: ↑Fri Jan 26, 2024 1:33 pm If I define a POI in MRA, and provided I attach the POI to the route as a POI (using the + symbol in the edit panel of the POI in MRA which leads to two options, one beeing "as POI" ), it is treated as a Garmin Waypoint when the gpx file is imported on the XT2 and it is included in the Waypoints library (exactly in the same manner as the Basecamp Waypoints). I took me some times to realize that the POIs needed to be added to the route explicitely and as described above. Otherwise in effect, there are not part of the saved gpx by MRA.

Some results of further investigations on this. This statement above is only true if the POI is selected from an MRA POI list. If I select one POI from a list and choose the "+" (Place the POI) option after clicking on the selected POI on the map, then I have effectively the option to add it as a Waypoint (MRA waypoint!) or as a POI. If added as a POI, importing the saved gpx1.1 file on the XT2 place the POI in the Waypoints library on the XT2.

If I create a new own POI, I have to use the "Add" option in the "Manage" tab of the POI panel. The only option available is then the name of the POI. But again saving the gpx1.1 of the route and importing the route on the XT2 place the POI in the Waypoints library on the XT2. If the XT2 is connected to Basecamp, it appears effectively as a Garmin Waypoint (blue flag) in the bottom left panel of user data. I could then create a virtual route in MRA and define all the POIs that I want to reuse after. To define a new route, I then start from this virtual route, since the POIs defined with "Manage" are associated to one route only and not available for all routes in MRA. Another option is the create a new route, define all the POIs that are wanted and save the POIs in a .csv file in MRA. Then in the "Library" tab of the POI panel, clicking on the option "Add" I can load the corresponding csv file to have the POIs available for all routes then in MRA, and use them as required when defining a new route in MRA. But since only the POIs used in an imported route appears in the Garmin Waypoints library on the XT2 or in Basecamp, the first solution is probably better if it is wanted to have all the own defined POIs available at once in the Garmin Waypoints library. Of course, if defining a route in MRA, it is possible to define a new own POI associated to that specific route with the "Manage" tab of the POI panel and it will be part of the Waypoints library on the XT2 after importing the corresponding specific route on the XT2.