New Etrex 20 and Geocaches using HTML?
#1
Posted 17 November 2011 - 12:04 PM
My question is, is there anyway to take a geocache page and convert it to simple text before I load it into GSAK and then send it to the Etrex 20?
SKTQCH
#2
Posted 17 November 2011 - 12:11 PM
#3
Posted 17 November 2011 - 12:16 PM
sussamb, on 17 November 2011 - 12:11 PM, said:
Because maybe the PQ is not exactly what you want. And if you actually *READ* the post you would have understood the problem is the HTML in the CACHE LISTING. How does simply dropping the cache into the GPX folder solve that problem?
This post has been edited by jholly: 17 November 2011 - 12:19 PM
#4
Posted 17 November 2011 - 12:33 PM
#5
Posted 17 November 2011 - 12:33 PM
sktqch, on 17 November 2011 - 12:04 PM, said:
My question is, is there anyway to take a geocache page and convert it to simple text before I load it into GSAK and then send it to the Etrex 20?
SKTQCH
I doubt there is much you can do before you send it to GSAK and upload it to your unit but there may be a macro for GSAK that can fix the problem for you.
#6
Posted 17 November 2011 - 12:51 PM
sktqch, on 17 November 2011 - 12:04 PM, said:
My question is, is there anyway to take a geocache page and convert it to simple text before I load it into GSAK and then send it to the Etrex 20?
SKTQCH
I went and looked at the GSAK library, you might find StripHTML useful.
#7
Posted 17 November 2011 - 01:32 PM
Please can you post a link to a cache that is causing problems.
#8
Posted 17 November 2011 - 02:16 PM
chillypenguin, on 17 November 2011 - 01:32 PM, said:
Please can you post a link to a cache that is causing problems.
Here's one of the caches that is causing the problem.
SKTQCH
http://www.geocachin...aspx?wp=GC24D74
#9
Posted 17 November 2011 - 02:24 PM
jholly, on 17 November 2011 - 12:16 PM, said:
sussamb, on 17 November 2011 - 12:11 PM, said:
Because maybe the PQ is not exactly what you want. And if you actually *READ* the post you would have understood the problem is the HTML in the CACHE LISTING. How does simply dropping the cache into the GPX folder solve that problem?
Thanks. I did actually read the post, hence my answer phrased as a question rather than a statement, as we're all here to learn you know
Clearly you know more about HTML, which is great, as I don't ... so thanks for the heads up
#10
Posted 17 November 2011 - 02:30 PM
So I went back to GSAK and that worked for 90% of the caches, it didn't take much detective work to figure out that it was the "fancy" ones (eg: using html codes) that weren't behaving properly on the little etrex.
SKTQCH
This post has been edited by sktqch: 17 November 2011 - 02:30 PM
#11
Posted 17 November 2011 - 02:34 PM
sktqch, on 17 November 2011 - 02:16 PM, said:
chillypenguin, on 17 November 2011 - 01:32 PM, said:
Please can you post a link to a cache that is causing problems.
Here's one of the caches that is causing the problem.
SKTQCH
http://www.geocachin...aspx?wp=GC24D74
Really?
There's nothing unusual about that HTML really, basic stuff.
#12
Posted 17 November 2011 - 02:48 PM
sussamb, on 17 November 2011 - 02:24 PM, said:
jholly, on 17 November 2011 - 12:16 PM, said:
sussamb, on 17 November 2011 - 12:11 PM, said:
Because maybe the PQ is not exactly what you want. And if you actually *READ* the post you would have understood the problem is the HTML in the CACHE LISTING. How does simply dropping the cache into the GPX folder solve that problem?
Thanks. I did actually read the post, hence my answer phrased as a question rather than a statement, as we're all here to learn you know
Clearly you know more about HTML, which is great, as I don't ... so thanks for the heads up
There is a lot more useful things, like stripping out the disabled caches, the caches that have a long string of DNF's but aren't disabled, pruning out areas you don't want to go to, limiting the caches to the ones along a route you want to take, and probably more that other folks can think of. Then there is the logging, it can be much easier with GSAK. None of that can be had by just dropping a PQ .gpx file on to the unit.
#13
Posted 17 November 2011 - 02:53 PM
Thank you for the "hint" Jholly, I wish you'd been with us a couple of days ago we could have used a few "hints" to pare down the dnfs.
SKTQCH
This post has been edited by sktqch: 17 November 2011 - 02:54 PM
#15
Posted 17 November 2011 - 06:31 PM
#16
Posted 17 November 2011 - 06:52 PM
The cache description in the gps now contains one line of what is regular text in the cache description, but none of the coloured text in the description.
Very disappointing as it worked well this afternoon.
SKTQCH
OH, and how can I get the Etrex 20 to download the attributes as a part of the .gpx file, or is that gsak that has to be changed?
#17
Posted 17 November 2011 - 07:20 PM
Wintertime, on 17 November 2011 - 06:31 PM, said:
Ah, what you just posted doesn't make sense. .gpx files are an xml file, not a HTML file. What is in the description is stored in GSAK, other information in the .gpx file is stored in GSAK. Nothing needs to be converted. The problem was the HTML in the description was causing problems with the etrex 20, not with GSAK.
#18
Posted 17 November 2011 - 07:23 PM
sktqch, on 17 November 2011 - 06:52 PM, said:
The cache description in the gps now contains one line of what is regular text in the cache description, but none of the coloured text in the description.
Very disappointing as it worked well this afternoon.
SKTQCH
OH, and how can I get the Etrex 20 to download the attributes as a part of the .gpx file, or is that gsak that has to be changed?
I am not really familiar with the macro, your best bet is to post on the GSAK boards in the macro suport thread. Or go read the thread on the macro.
This post has been edited by jholly: 17 November 2011 - 07:24 PM
#19
Posted 17 November 2011 - 07:43 PM
jholly, on 17 November 2011 - 07:20 PM, said:
There's no problem with viewing HTML cache descriptions on an eTrex 20, so the problem must be happening during the description's trip through GSAK. The OP should be fine if he drags those .gpx files directly over to his eTrex.
I own two caches that include HTML in their descriptions, and they display very well on my eTrex 20. There are a few spurious blank lines, but the HTML lists, boldface, etc. that I encoded come across as expected.
#20
Posted 17 November 2011 - 07:55 PM
Also I just had a thought, do you have a memory card in your gps?
Also I'm still running software version 2.10, would that make a difference?
SKTQCH
This post has been edited by sktqch: 17 November 2011 - 08:21 PM
#21
Posted 17 November 2011 - 07:55 PM
Wintertime, on 17 November 2011 - 07:43 PM, said:
... with any of the listings that you've tried.
It's well possible that the example cache that was posted contains HTML that makes the eTrex hiccup, even though quite frankly I can't imagine what that would be. I did see very lengthy descriptions (notably earthcaches) that brought the Oregon to its knees. Stripping HTML can make a world of difference, GSAK or not.
Of course it's also possible that GSAK is indeed screwing up the listings somehow. But that would be a bug in GSAK that needs to be fixed.
This post has been edited by dfx: 17 November 2011 - 07:56 PM
#22
Posted 17 November 2011 - 08:53 PM
sktqch, on 17 November 2011 - 07:55 PM, said:
/GPX
Quote
Yes, but none of my geocaches are on it.
Quote
I upgraded to 2.40 a few days ago, so I can't check that.
#23
Posted 17 November 2011 - 09:02 PM
dfx, on 17 November 2011 - 07:55 PM, said:
True, the eTrex may have trouble with some HTML. But it doesn't have an inherent inability to display HTML.
[edit 11/18]
Forgot to mention: I can view the cache mentioned by the OP (http://www.geocachin...aspx?wp=GC24D74) just fine on my eTrex 20. I loaded it directly from the Send to GPS button the cache page; I don't use GSAK. However, I noticed with both my own HTML cache descriptions and this one that it's important to have the GPSr set with dark text on a light background. Otherwise some of the text may not be visible, even though it's actually there.
This post has been edited by Wintertime: 18 November 2011 - 08:49 AM
#24
Posted 18 November 2011 - 06:09 PM
That's the solution, dark text on a light background. I was wondering why the cache description had big gaps in it with no text. The text was really there, it was just black text on a black background.
So now the real question is........Why the &@#% doesn't Garmin document these things and include them in a manual?????????????
SKTQCH
#25
Posted 18 November 2011 - 06:18 PM
sktqch, on 18 November 2011 - 06:09 PM, said:
I'm afraid I don't have an answer for that question!
I can't comprehend why they build in all sorts of user customizations and then don't tell us what all our options are...
#26
Posted 19 November 2011 - 01:03 AM
#27
Posted 19 November 2011 - 02:45 AM
#28
Posted 19 November 2011 - 09:36 AM
sussamb, on 19 November 2011 - 01:03 AM, said:
I don't mind the printed in-box startup guide being minimal, and I can even see a case for having a mid-level PDF owner's guide. But they should also make available a PDF'd reference guide that lists all the options and what they contain. For example, not just say, "There are profiles with these names," but list what the default settings are for each of those profiles.
#30
Posted 03 February 2012 - 05:19 PM
I bought also a Etrex 20, got to be premium member, and got stuck with some trouble like you, it gets strange code (I think it's HTML but not sure) you can see it over here after download the GPX file, http://coord.info/GC340T5
I think you'll see strange code there.
Don't know what to do to solve this.
Thanks, have a nice caching
This post has been edited by Vinnys: 03 February 2012 - 05:24 PM
#31
Posted 04 February 2012 - 09:16 PM
Patty
#32
Posted 11 March 2012 - 02:03 PM
The issue is that if I try to read the description on etrex20, and if it has html on it, etrex20 will get slow and stuck for a while, after a while I get to read a lot of html code, mixed with usefull text and information.
I think the best thing is to use some kind of script that removes html code from the gpx that goes to the etrex20, so the etrex can present me the usefull text/information, quick and readable for me.
Well, this is the problem.
Thanks anyway
#33
Posted 22 February 2013 - 07:14 PM
However, the problem when a pocket query is generated is the same. If GPX file is saved directly to etrex no problem, html is ok.
Maybe someone in Groundspeak developer area can put a save with strip and without strip (EASY TO INTRODUCE).
For example... if description have someting in bold <b>best cache in the world</b> when send to etrex appear like this <b> when ....
WE PAY OUR PREMIUM MEMBER TO QUICK GET DATA, AFTER ALL WE WAST MORE TIME TO CLEAN TRASH PRODUCED BY Groundspeak.
I'M NOT HAPPY FOR SURE...
For pocket queries, can be used a converter like this http://htmlentities.net/, paste the code and decode, after decode all html is ok in etrex or any other gps device
This post has been edited by bitpt: 22 February 2013 - 07:49 PM
#34
Posted 22 February 2013 - 07:49 PM
GPX (as used by pocket queries), like all XML make it trivial to prove correctness of a file via a process called "validation". If the file validates, but doesn't work, it's a problem with the GPX reader. If it doesn't validate, it's a problem with the GPX writer. This makes placing blame for problems easy. "Valid" and "Not working correctly/sensibly" remain two different things. What bitpt is showing is entity encoding and it's the correct way to smuggle one XML-ish format (like HTML) in another XML format, like GPX. Otherwise, you could put </gpx> or </html> in my cache description and end the GPX or HTML tag and that would be bad as it would interpretet that tag (a benign <b> in your example, but rather more tragic in mine) and blow up the reader or do something like embed a geocache inside another or other forms of evil.
There is an attribute in the long description and short_description fields of the Groundspeak:short_description and groundspeak_long description tags. In the example shown by bitpt, either the owner didn't set them (owner problem), they're set by the owner but not in the PQ (a surprising thing for Groundspeak to get wrong as people would be mutinying in the streets, , but it could happen) or the reader is ignoring that flag or not actually capable of rendering HTML. (Since all Garmin's geocaching units since Colorado have rendered this, this would probably "just" be a bug.)
When I download the GPX for http://www.geocachin...aspx?wp=GC24D74, going through the options, I see
<Groundspeak:short_description html="True"><font size="4" color="black">Location is a distance off the K-nine
trail in the Southstar hiking trails in the Gold Creek area near
Cranbrook. This recreation area is a gem that many people use
year-round. There is cross country-skiing and snowshoeing in winter
as well as hiking.<br />
<br />
This cache is for all those geocaching dog owners and lovers. There
are a lot of them caching in the East Kootenays.</font><br /></Groundspeak:short_description>
<Groundspeak:long_description html="True"><font size="4" color="red">You will have to determine who is the
Pointer and who is the Setter.</font><br />
<br />
The owner has checked HTML and Groundspeak has indicated that with the html="True" for both fields. The HTML is unnecessarily goofy, but basically sensible and the entity escaping seems fine. Seem like you and Vinnys, and other owners of this model need to ask Garmin why the 20 isn't acting like the earlier models and rendering that correctly. (You'll probably get further with them if you get an owner of another of their models to confirm that, say, an Oregon 450 running version firmware X renders it fine (include screenshots) when bugreporting it.)

Help








