Bart Eisenberg writes:
> Per @Harry van der Wolf, I've been experimenting with the Measure distance
> feature, and I agree, it's a fast, flexible way to create GPXs.
>
> The function has two ways to create a GPX, which begs a question: why would
> you save a route as "a line" rather than as "route points"? Looking at the
> resulting GPXs, it appears that both use trkpt coordinates. In addition,
> saving as "route points" also include rtept coordinates ("turn points" in
> the GPX schema), which are the places you have marked out with the Measure
> tool.
>
> Route points have some advantages. Is there any reason not to have them?
I use Measure Distance sometimes while hiking. So far I haven't
used it to create a GPX, but I could see wanting that, especially
if I didn't have an app on my computer that could generate GPX.
There isn't necessarily any marked trail on these hikes, and even if
there is one, we might not be using it (or I might be running OsmAnd
specifically so I can add it to the map later). I don't use routing,
I just look at the map; but I do use GPX files to figure out where
we need to go, and Measure Distance to get an estimate of how far it
is to the next trail intersection, or peak, or other feature.
Do rtept coordinates work when there's no marked path and you're
just viewing the track on a map while traveling off trail?
...Akkana
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"OsmAnd" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/osmand/20200315175427.GK1955%40shallowsky.com.
