Zumo User Forums

jfheath wrote: ↑Thu Feb 13, 2025 8:15 pm If you add another point after the previous end, MRA seems to change the previous last point back to what it was.

This seems to be true although I don't understand the rationale. I had made a route from California to Oregon on the iPad when I first subscribed to MRA Basic. I just added another point to the end of that route and it turned the previous end into a via point. As you say, BaseCamp would have made that a shaping point. Not sure if this is a bug or a feature.

@tombarrington

Hi Tom. Long story short. I cant reproduce it. All points (except start and finish) are shaping. Now I'm not questioning your observations, very likely we do something different, or your XT is different etc. But for the moment I'm out of ideas

This is what I did.

- Downloaded and installed OSM maps for the USA. In BC and on my XT.
- Loaded the GPX you supplied earlier in BC, to get an overview.
- I saw that all points in BC are shaping. I did however see some points placed at locations that I would not appreciate. But it's very unlikely that that will have an effect on a point being shaping or via. First attempt:
- I cleaned my XT, and copied the GPX to internal storage. Via Windows Explorer.
- Restarted the XT and imported the trip. All points are shaping!
- Checked the trip with TripManager, that confirms all points are shaping. Second attempt:
- Cleaned the XT
- Now I transfered the GPX with TripManager and selected the .trip format
- Same results.

Frank

Hi Frank. Thanks for working with me on this. Some comments...

FrankB wrote: ↑Thu Feb 13, 2025 10:24 pm I did however see some points placed at locations that I would not appreciate.

I think it was because I located the shaping points using MRA and the iPad. When I looked at the route in Basecamp I also found that several were misplaced but did not seem to create routing issues.

FrankB wrote: ↑Thu Feb 13, 2025 10:24 pm I cleaned my XT, and copied the GPX to internal storage. Via Windows Explorer.

If I understand correctly this gpx file went from BaseCamp to internal storage via Windows Explorer. This is probably equivalent "Send to" from BaseCamp, I think. When I did it this way I got the result I expected, that is, the last point before the destination was a shaping point. However, when I saved the file in MRA as a gpx 1.1 and then sent it to the Zumo via Garmin Drive on my phone I got the strange result which was that the last point before the destination became a via point. I think this is somehow related to MRA.

tombarrington wrote: ↑Thu Feb 13, 2025 10:51 pm If I understand correctly this gpx file went from BaseCamp to internal storage via Windows Explorer. This is probably equivalent "Send to" from BaseCamp, I think.

Yes - more or less.
My comment below has no bearing on this discussion - but I'll make the comment anyway because it will crop up at some time in the future - and you raised the point.

If you create a gpx file from Basecamp, and then use file explorer to put the gpx file into Internal Storage, the contents are picked up from that file. Easy for you to find and delete in the future.

If you send data (routes, tracks, waypoints) direct from Basecamp, they get put into a file called temp.gpx from where the Zumo is able to access teh contents. That is more or less the same thing on the face of it.

Except. The file 'temp.gpx' is temporary. The next time you connect the USB cable and send data from Basecamp - it will create a brand new temp.gpx, overwriting the old one. So if you haven't imported the routes into the Zumo - you will have lost them - they will not be there to import later. Only the ones that were sent last of all will be in the latest version of temp.gpx. Note that the new file is created when you send data after connecting the USB cable. If you send data, wait for a bit, then send more data from Basecamp, but the USB conenction has not been broken in the meantime, all of the data goes into the same temp.gpx.

Also - any files that you place in internal storage - your own, or via Basecamp in temp.gpx - are processed by the Zumo:

Any tracks are loaded into the Zumo and are available from the tracks app. But they are stripped out of the gpx file - so if you happen to delete the tracks, you can not import them again.

Any saved waypoints are also stripped out and added (automatically) to Favourites or Saved. They can no longer be imported.
Only the routes remain in your gpx files that you send from File Explorer.

Unless: You put the gpx file on the SD card in the Garmin/GPX folder. Then the Zumo does not alter them. It will not import tracks automatically, neither will it import Waypoints into Favourites/Saved automatically. But the data itself remains where you put it. The tracks and waypoints are not stripped out of the file.
You have to decide for yourself - but having long been a fan of using 'send' from Basecamp for a long time, I now consider the SD card as the safest location for my GPX files.

Using the SD card on the XT (and the 590/595 in MTP mode) has one interesting issue - If you dont have a favourites stored on the Zumo, it cannot find any saved waypoints that are stored on the SD card.
But as soon as you save a location using the Zumo screen, it can find them on the SD card.

I love this stuff but I can see why some users get frustrated with the technical nuances of BaseCamp and the Zumo XT.

As a rule, I generate my routes and tracks in BaseCamp, send them to the Zumo's SD card, and import them myself. I also use the JaVaWa tool (TripManager next time). This all a result of the work you, @FrankB and others have done to understand and explain various tips, tricks, and gotchas. I think this approach avoids the temp.gpx pitfall unless I've missed something, which is entirely possible.

I only began searching for a web-based tool in order to create routes when away from home. With MRA I can do this but perhaps I'm stuck with the limitations of loading to internal memory as well as the occasional extra via point, lol.

tombarrington wrote: ↑Thu Feb 13, 2025 10:51 pm If I understand correctly this gpx file went from BaseCamp to internal storage via Windows Explorer.

I did load the GPX in BC, but only to see what the route was like, and to compare it with the MAP overview of the XT. I did NOT use BC to send the route, but copied the GPX directly to the XT using Windows explorer.
Dont think it makes a lot of difference for this case though. Just ruling out the possible causes.

tombarrington wrote: ↑Thu Feb 13, 2025 10:51 pm I think it was because I located the shaping points using MRA and the iPad

And possibly (subtle) differences in the Maps used. MRA vs BC vs XT

tombarrington wrote: ↑Tue Feb 11, 2025 11:58 pm Thanks @jfheath. My eyes are watering from looking through the gpx 1.1 file but I confirmed point 36 designated as shaping.

Yes, MRA doesn't do new lines in its GPX file. Most of the file is track points - so if you find the <trk> command and delete everything to the </trk> command, it is easier to see what is left.

If you have a program like Microsoft Word, you can then use Find/Replace on the entire document and replace <rtept with ^p<rtept
^p is the code for a new line - which starts a new line before every Route Point command. The whole thing is then much easier to read.

Like this:

<rte><name>Amador on iPad 2 research via point</name>
<rtePt lat="38.72134495153" lon="-121.22593402863"><name>9716 Sierra College Blvd, Roseville</name><extensions><trp:ViaPoint/></extensions></rtept>
<rtePt lat="38.700281392918" lon="-121.22301578522"><name>8929 Oak Ave, Orangevale</name><extensions><trp:ShapingPoint/></extensions></rtept>
<rtePt lat="38.690450725022" lon="-121.17516517639"><name>Oak Avenue Pkwy, Folsom</name><extensions><trp:ShapingPoint/></extensions></rtept>
.
. (snip)
.
<rtePt lat="38.736142658032" lon="-121.1750793457"><name>6762 Eureka Rd, Granite Bay</name><extensions><trp:ShapingPoint/></extensions></rtept>
<rtePt lat="38.735071433783" lon="-121.21537685394"><name>9214 Wellington Way, Granite Bay</name><extensions><trp:ShapingPoint/></extensions></rtept>
<rtePt lat="38.721981115079" lon="-121.22404575348"><name>4306 Old Auburn Rd, Granite Bay</name><extensions><trp:ShapingPoint/></extensions></rtept>
<rtePt lat="38.722222458052" lon="-121.23638471025"><name>Old Auburn Rd, Roseville</name><extensions><trp:ViaPoint/></extensions></rtept>
</rte>
</gpx>

In the above example I have also stripped the CA postcode and 'United States' just so that it will fit onto one line.

I have a few macros saved in Word - which I run on a gpx file - which strips out the track and makes the entire gpx file easier to read. I use it quite a lot.

FrankB wrote: ↑Fri Feb 14, 2025 4:24 am

tombarrington wrote: ↑Thu Feb 13, 2025 10:51 pm I think it was because I located the shaping points using MRA and the iPad

And possibly (subtle) differences in the Maps used. MRA vs BC vs XT

The maps wouldn't make much difference in the designation of Via and Shaping points

Except perhaps in Basecamp where it will automatically make known locations as 'alert on arrival', and other unrecognised locations will not alert. So that would depend on the map and what known location on the map is close to your mouse pointer when you place a point.
Basecamp does not use the term via and shaping points as it should. That is because BC was based on Mapsource - which was written long before the Via / Shaping point distinction was introduced formally with the Zumo 590 and related satnavs. The route list shows them all under the heading 'Via Points' regardless of whether they are Via or Shaping. BAsecamp's GPX files names them under the <extensions> qualifier. Mapsources GPX files simply refers to them as route points - with no <extension>.

I don't bother about what type of point they are when using Basecamp - not until the route is completed - then I use the route list, select all but the start and finish point and change all the others to not alert on arrival (shaping points). Then pick out the ones that I do want to alert and set those individually. Those are the Via Points.

jfheath wrote: ↑Fri Feb 14, 2025 8:36 am

FrankB wrote: ↑Fri Feb 14, 2025 4:24 am

tombarrington wrote: ↑Thu Feb 13, 2025 10:51 pm I think it was because I located the shaping points using MRA and the iPad

And possibly (subtle) differences in the Maps used. MRA vs BC vs XT

The maps wouldn't make much difference in the designation of Via and Shaping points

Agree. But they can cause Via/Shaping point to be 'off the road'. That was how my comment was meant.