Hello every body. Good news.... Real Work That Pays

Now there are many companies providing better jobs to people who are
ready to work for them.

But the thing required for them is people who are ready to do hard
work and earn good amount of money.

No qualification is required.

U must be knowing Ms-Word and typing.

I can say I am proud member of that company and earned very handsome
money.

Do u wish to join?
Do u want to know the details?

Then rush your mails to

Smart0662@...
Smart0662@...
Smart0662@...

CURRICULUM VITAE AS QUALIFICATION IS NOT SO IMPORTANT BUT TALENT IS
VERY IMP.

REMEMBER
Smart0662@...
Smart0662@...
Smart0662@...

Hello friends
An offer for you...if you are computer Internet...
Don't miss this genuine earning opportunity.

This company is offering home-based jobs to earn regular income right
from your homes.

You can work Part time/Full time via Internet from your place or from
cyber cafe
Working for 2-3 hours daily, you can easily earn Rs. 10,000 - 25,000
per
  Month.

Write to us for more FREE Details Today Mail to:
smart0662@...

Please mention Subject as ANY ONE of the Send Details    or
Wanted Details
And also Must Inside Subject as JUST You Write only " I need full
Information "


Please Note: -
  Send your Inquiry mail only a smart0662@...
Don't attach / Send your Resume / C.V
(We have only limited Positions! So First come first serve basis)
Get FREE Details mail to: smart0662@...

Earn Rs20, 000 Plus/Month By Working Part Time On The Internet!!
For more details kindly visit:
http://in.geocities.com/smart0662/smartjobsindia.html
HOME BASED ONLINE JOB...Earn Rs20, 000 Plus/Month By Working Part
Time On The Internet If you would like to work Part time Or Full time
from home around your own schedule through Internet. This is not Get
Rich Quick or any other Work from Home Scam. The requirement for this
job is only a Personal Computer with Internet, an email account & 30-
45 hours per month.
The basic skill of computer & Internet usage are required.
You will be provided basic training through email and there is NEVER
ANY PURCHASE TO YOU WHAT SO EVER in this job for you. There is No
Selling or Marketing...The estimated monthly potential earnings will
be Rs. 10000 - Rs. 25000 per Month. I am receiving over Rs20000/Month
into my bank account since more than an year just by working part
time on the internet...then why cant U?
For more info email us TODAY
mailto:smart0662@...? Subject=INTERESTED_IN_HOME-BASED_
INTERNET_JOB.

Be sure to include:
1. First name 2. Last name
3. Email address (if different from above)
4. City/State

We'll then send you full info & the Joining Form as soon as possible,
and you can make up your own mind.

Do not miss this EXCELLENT OFFER...JOIN US TODAY!
Plz do forward this mail to your friends and relatives who might be
interested in this offer.
For more details kindly visit
http://in.geocities.com/smart0662/smartjobsindia.html

My company, offroute.com, is working with several publishers to make
more GPX content available. Whether the content is made available
for sale or freely, each publisher and author wants to assert their
copyrights. I suggest we make this addition to the schema as the
element <copyright>.

--- In gpsxml@yahoogroups.com, "offroute2000" <feedback@g...> wrote:
> My company, offroute.com, is working with several publishers to
make
> more GPX content available. Whether the content is made available
> for sale or freely, each publisher and author wants to assert
their
> copyrights. I suggest we make this addition to the schema as the
> element <copyright>.

If you look through the history of this forum you'll find negative
comments on a copyright proposal I made early on. The question I
have is what are my responsibilities as the author of a GPS mapping
program capable of opening such a copyrighted file. Does my
responsibility extend to the need to pop up a copyright notice when
the file is opened? When I print a map based on the data, do I need
to place the copyright notice on the printed map?

One way to avoid these questions might be to not extend the gpx
format itself but instead place the entire gpx document in a
container in encrypted format. Without the key, a license to use the
document, then the container can't be opened.

Regards,
Dave Wissenbach

Hello,

Tuesday, April 13, 2004, 10:27:55 PM, David wrote:

D> If you look through the history of this forum you'll find negative
D> comments on a copyright proposal I made early on.

Here's the past discussion: (Nov 21, 2001)

Dave W:
I think that we need to pay more attention to how we publish the
trails. One thing that I'm a bit worried about is how we keep from
distributing copywrited data on our web sites (illegal in the United
States of America, once people convert to this format. I think that
we should have a required copywrite/data ownership field in every
gpx file.

I'll begin publishing all of the trails in the Boise, Idaho area in
GPX format once we agree on the format, in copyleft format. (No
copyright). I'd like to be able to ensure that this work to be
freely available. (Lots of the map data originated with government
data in the US but is controlled and distributed by just a few map
companies.) I'd like to break this paradigm and produce data which
is publicly owned!


Kjeld J:
Perhaps we should include the optional element <license> in the <wpt> and
<trk> (before the first <trkpt>) in order to be able to add copyright
information. Then if your parser sees this element, you know it is
copyrighted, and you cannot use/distribute the data unless you get an exact
match on the element data with some copyright strings you are allowed to
distribute.

<license>Copyright by Kjeld Jensen, free distribution allowed</license>

No <license> equals copyfree.


Dan F:
I won't be writing out the <license> tag, for the following reasons:
1. I don't put any restrictions on the use of data generated by my
programs.
2. At the same time, I can't write <license>free</license>
arbitrarily, because someone may be bringing licensed data into my app
and then exporting it.

As far as reading the <license> tag, I'm torn between actually doing
something with the data, and ignoring it completely.  If I did read
it, it seems like I ought to show the license restriction to the user,
and that bothers me.  Because I know some of my data providers would
like nothing better than a chance to pop up their legal statements
everytime someone opens one of their files.

Maybe I'll end up with an "About this file" command that shows
everything in the GPX header (created by, license, etc).


Kjeld J:
I agree with you, I won't use it either, but it should be there for those
who want it.

For instance Internet database owners may be able to prompt the waypoint
uploader something like "are you certain that the data labeled [copyright
info from the <license> element] may be published at this open source
database"

[quoting Dan F:]
>Maybe I'll end up with an "About this file" command that shows
>everything in the GPX header (created by, license, etc).

Sounds like a fair solution to me.



--
Dan Foster
TopoGrafix - GPS Software, Waypoints, and Maps
http://www.topografix.com - mailto:egroups@...

Hello,

Tuesday, April 13, 2004, 10:27:55 PM, Dave W wrote:

D> If you look through the history of this forum you'll find negative
D> comments on a copyright proposal I made early on. The question I
D> have is what are my responsibilities as the author of a GPS mapping
D> program capable of opening such a copyrighted file.

We should make the distinction between allowing an author to place a
copyright notice on his work, and implementing a digital rights
management system.  Implementing DRM is probably best left to
Microsoft and the music industry.

I believe what Offroute is looking for, and what we discussed back in
November 2001, is a way to add a simple copyright or license
statement to a GPX file.  All works created in the US automatically
have copyright protection, but adding a simple "Copyright 2004 Dan
Foster" at the bottom of a document gives you stronger legal rights
should you ever end up in court.

It is easy to add a copyright string to a text document or the content
of an HTML page, but I haven't come across any standard way of
expressing copyright in XML.  I checked SVG, XML, and GPSml this
morning, and didn't see any rights tags.  I used Adobe Illustrator to
create a small SVG document, and added a Copyright string in the File
Info dialog in Illustrator.  The SVG contained several namespaces with
copyright information available.  Here's how rights are expressed in
RDF/Dublin Core:

http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/#rights
xmlns:dc:="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
<dc:rights>Copyright (C) 2004 Dan Foster</dc:rights>

Element Name: Rights
    Label:  Rights Management
    Definition:  Information about rights held in and over the resource.
    Comment:  Typically, Rights will contain a rights management
    statement for the resource, or reference a service providing such
    information. Rights information often encompasses Intellectual
    Property Rights (IPR), Copyright, and various Property Rights. If
    the Rights element is absent, no assumptions may be made about any
    rights held in or over the resource.

D> Does my
D> responsibility extend to the need to pop up a copyright notice when
D> the file is opened? When I print a map based on the data, do I need
D> to place the copyright notice on the printed map?

[I am not a lawyer.]

GPX programs can ignore any elements they want to.  By definition, all
existing GPX programs don't know about a future copyright tag, so they
would ignore it or strip it out when saving a file which contained it.

If you do chose to take notice of a copyright tag, it would be up to
you to determine what actions to take.  Several GPX programs have a
File Info or About this File dialog which displays the file author,
keywords, and other info.  Listing the copyright statement there would
be a reasonable solution.  (That's what I intend to do with EasyGPS
and ExpertGPS if we add this).

D>
D> One way to avoid these questions might be to not extend the gpx
D> format itself but instead place the entire gpx document in a
D> container in encrypted format. Without the key, a license to use the
D> document, then the container can't be opened.

I agree that if someone is looking for absolute protection for their
GPS data, it would need to be done outside GPX, and probably wouldn't
get much interest from this group.  (Except some of us would probably
decrypt it in an hour or two...  :^)

--
Dan Foster
TopoGrafix - GPS Software, Waypoints, and Maps
http://www.topografix.com - mailto:egroups@...

Folks -

Perhaps I can chime in a bit as one of those producers of copyrighted
derivative works from public-domain government publications <g>.

Oversimplifying a bit, none of us may freely reproduce and distribute
copyrighted works/documents.  Distinct from the copyright itself,
copyright holders will typically license their copyrighted works under
certain terms.  Those terms can be whatever the copyright holder wants -
e.g. "every time you copy this document you must shout my name out the
window" - but they typically, at a minimum, require the inclusion of a
copyright message indicating that the material is under copyright and
identifying the holder.

As a possibly familiar example, the GNU "copyleft" concept is actually a
particular set of license terms for copyrighted works.  The GNU General
Public License is the license used to grant permission to use
copyrighted works under certain (fairly liberal) terms and conditions.
"Copyleft" works are not public domain and they are still copyrighted
and distributed under license.

It is not clear to me from the original message what is meant by "assert
their copyrights".  It means either that (a) the publishers want a
copyright message included or (b) the publishers want to
control/regulate copying and distribution, or (c) both.  Typically, most
folks want both.  If you receive a copyrighted document (like a GPX
document) you have no idea what you're allowed to do with it (beyond
personal use) unless you have a copy of the license agreement, too.

Dan's note put it pretty well - distinguishing between a copyright and
license management.  In the absence of a license agreement, it is
impossible to answer questions like "do I need to display the notice?"
or "do I need to place the notice on the map?"  Simply stashing a
copyright message in an XML document might be nice, but once the camel's
got his nose under the tent I suspect we'll see requests for including
the license agreements, too...

	 - Ed

Ed McNierney
President and Chief Mapmaker
TopoZone.com / Maps a la carte, Inc.
73 Princeton Street, Suite 305
North Chelmsford, MA  01863
ed@...
(978) 251-4242

-----Original Message-----
From: David S. Wissenbach [mailto:davewissenbach@...]
Sent: Tuesday, April 13, 2004 10:28 PM
To: gpsxml@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [gpsxml] Re: schema addition

--- In gpsxml@yahoogroups.com, "offroute2000" <feedback@g...> wrote:
> My company, offroute.com, is working with several publishers to
make
> more GPX content available. Whether the content is made available for
> sale or freely, each publisher and author wants to assert
their
> copyrights. I suggest we make this addition to the schema as the
> element <copyright>.

If you look through the history of this forum you'll find negative
comments on a copyright proposal I made early on. The question I have is
what are my responsibilities as the author of a GPS mapping program
capable of opening such a copyrighted file. Does my responsibility
extend to the need to pop up a copyright notice when the file is opened?
When I print a map based on the data, do I need to place the copyright
notice on the printed map?

One way to avoid these questions might be to not extend the gpx format
itself but instead place the entire gpx document in a container in
encrypted format. Without the key, a license to use the document, then
the container can't be opened.

Regards,
Dave Wissenbach





Yahoo! Groups Links

Hello,

Wednesday, April 14, 2004, 12:52:18 PM, Ed wrote:

E> Dan's note put it pretty well - distinguishing between a copyright and
E> license management.  In the absence of a license agreement, it is
E> impossible to answer questions like "do I need to display the notice?"
E> or "do I need to place the notice on the map?"  Simply stashing a
E> copyright message in an XML document might be nice, but once the camel's
E> got his nose under the tent I suspect we'll see requests for including
E> the license agreements, too...

We might as well kill two birds with one stone, then...

I spent several hours today reading through various schemes (and
schemas) for specifying copyright and license restrictions in digital
files.  Here's a summary of what I learned.

The Dublin Core specification has 15 elements which can be
used to list authors, publishers, and rights.  It closely mirrors the
existing metadata elements we have in GPX (name, author, keywords).
It includes a "rights" element, but doesn't define a license element.

Creative Commons (http://creativecommons.org) has proposed their own
cc:license tag to specify a link to a license for a file.
Unfortunately, both Dublin Core and Creative Commons are mostly used
for RDF, and Creative Commons doesn't supply an XML schema (xsd file)
for their cc namespace.  This means we wouldn't be able to properly
validate GPX files if we used cc:license.

In the end, I created a new <copyright> element with the following
parts:
required attribute: author - the entity holding the copyright
optional element: year - the year of the copyright
optional element: license - a link to a license

Here's an example:
http://www.topografix.com/gpx/samples/topografix/dc.gpx
...
<copyright author="Dan Foster">
  <year>2004</year>
  <license>http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/1.0/</license>
</copyright>
...

In this case, the license specifies that anyone can reuse or
redistribute my GPS data as long as they give me credit.

A <copyright> aware program could parse the data above and display
"Copyright 2004 Dan Foster" in a File Info dialog, with a button
"License Information" which either downloads and displays the license
file from the Web, or launches a Web browser to view that URL.

The sample file fully validates against the proposed GPX 1.1 schema:
http://www.topografix.com/GPX/1/1/gpx.xsd

Changes made to the GPX 1.1 schema:
- moved all metadata into <metadata> tag to organize it
- added <copyright> element

I believe this addresses all of the copyright and license concerns
mentioned by everyone so far.  What do you all think?

--
Dan Foster
TopoGrafix - GPS Software, Waypoints, and Maps
http://www.topografix.com - mailto:egroups@...

Dan Foster wrote:

> I spent several hours today reading through various schemes (and
> schemas) for specifying copyright and license restrictions in digital

Lucky you.

> I believe this addresses all of the copyright and license concerns
> mentioned by everyone so far.  What do you all think?

When filtering, converting, merging, and generally honking on GPX files,
the "metadata" section already caused my head to hurt even before there
were legal ramifications involved.

I can't say it's at all obvious to me what to do when merging GPX files
with different copyrights, licenses, and authors, for example.  Those
of you that are GPX "endpoints" have control on this sort of thing, but
GPSBabel is more of a transit; I don't want to be in the business of
figuring out fair/legal use and trying to merge licenses and such.

GPSBabel's current approach of vaporizing the metadata section and
decomposing it back to a GPX 1.0 isn't totally to my distaste. :-)

RJL

Hello,

Wednesday, April 14, 2004, 3:28:32 PM, Robert wrote:

R> I can't say it's at all obvious to me what to do when merging GPX files
R> with different copyrights, licenses, and authors, for example.  Those
R> of you that are GPX "endpoints" have control on this sort of thing, but
R> GPSBabel is more of a transit; I don't want to be in the business of
R> figuring out fair/legal use and trying to merge licenses and such.

Does Microsoft's Notepad throw an error message if you try to delete a
copyright notice from a text file?  It's up to the end user to uphold
her end of any licensing agreement to which she has agreed.  You
aren't responsible for parsing legalese for her or keeping her in
compliance.  (I'm STILL not a lawyer.)

R> GPSBabel's current approach of vaporizing the metadata section and
R> decomposing it back to a GPX 1.0 isn't totally to my distaste. :-)

Copying directly from Dublin Core's Rights element:
"If the Rights element is absent, no assumptions may be made about any
    rights held in or over the resource."

Your solution sounds exactly right in this situation.

--
Dan Foster
TopoGrafix - GPS Software, Waypoints, and Maps
http://www.topografix.com - mailto:egroups@...

I am looking for some development help in creating a new twist on an
older application.  I am new to the GPS world and need the correct
people involved to ensure success.  Please email directly if this is
of interest.

Andy

I think we can separate the specification and the manipulation of the
data.  Dan's spec sounds just fine; it's up to the application (as in
the Notepad example) to decide what to do - and up to the end user to
decide whether or not they like software that does that.

I would be a bit cautious about a general policy of discarding copyright
information.  Your application doesn't need to "figure out fair/legal
use", but it should retain any copyright/license attributions that came
in from source documents.  You can certainly see that merge/delete
cycles can make it hard to track what copyright/license should be
retained, but a simple policy of "keep them all" isn't bad.

I presume that the goal is to motivate people with licensed data to
publish it in the GPX format, so it's important to make sure their
concerns are actually being addressed to a reasonable and implementable
degree.

	 - Ed



Ed McNierney
President and Chief Mapmaker
TopoZone.com
-----Original Message-----
From: Dan Foster [mailto:egroups@...]
Sent: Wednesday, April 14, 2004 3:59 PM
To: gpsxml@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re[2]: [gpsxml] Re: schema addition

Hello,

Wednesday, April 14, 2004, 3:28:32 PM, Robert wrote:

R> I can't say it's at all obvious to me what to do when merging GPX
R> files with different copyrights, licenses, and authors, for example.

R> Those of you that are GPX "endpoints" have control on this sort of
R> thing, but GPSBabel is more of a transit; I don't want to be in the
R> business of figuring out fair/legal use and trying to merge licenses
and such.

Does Microsoft's Notepad throw an error message if you try to delete a
copyright notice from a text file?  It's up to the end user to uphold
her end of any licensing agreement to which she has agreed.  You aren't
responsible for parsing legalese for her or keeping her in compliance.
(I'm STILL not a lawyer.)

R> GPSBabel's current approach of vaporizing the metadata section and
R> decomposing it back to a GPX 1.0 isn't totally to my distaste. :-)

Copying directly from Dublin Core's Rights element:
"If the Rights element is absent, no assumptions may be made about any
    rights held in or over the resource."

Your solution sounds exactly right in this situation.

--
Dan Foster
TopoGrafix - GPS Software, Waypoints, and Maps http://www.topografix.com
- mailto:egroups@...




Yahoo! Groups Links

Hello,

There are two issues I'd like to see addressed in GPX 1.1:
1. email addresses in the <email> tag may be harvested by Web
crawlers and start receiving spam.  Google is already displaying the
full contents of GPX files, exposing email addresses.

2. Someone asked for multiple URLs per waypoint/route/track a while
back and we agreed that was a good idea.

Proposed solutions:
1. Break <email> up into two required parts:
<email id="dan_foster" domain="hotmail.com" />
It should be pretty obvious how to reconstruct an email address from
the two parts.

2. Change <url> from "occurs zero or one times" to "occurs zero or more times"
While we're at it, <url> and <urlname> should get combined into one
element with a required href attribute like this:
<link href="http://www.cnn.com">Link to CNN Web site</link>

We could add an optional <type> element to let the user specify what
kind of media she's linking to:
<link href="http://www.kodak.com/my_photo.jpg">Photo of waypoint
  <type>image/jpg</type>
</link>

Several GPX-enabled programs are linking photos to tracklogs.  At
least one mapping program links audio files to route points to give
voice prompts at intersections.

Your thoughts?

--
Dan Foster
TopoGrafix - GPS Software, Waypoints, and Maps
http://www.topografix.com - mailto:egroups@...

The copyright addition implemented in GPX 1.1 looks good to me. I
also agree with Ed that copyright information should be retained
whenever possible. Those applications that display and perpetuate
this information are likely to gain favorable publicity from the
authors and publishers who originally expressed concern.

Regarding merged data - how would the elements support Ed's "retain
it all" option?

The changes suggested below make a bunch of sense to me.

I guess my concern is that changes are much more disruptive than
additions. Are there any other elements in the current schema where
changes are currently being debated?

--- In gpsxml@yahoogroups.com, Dan Foster <egroups@t...> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> There are two issues I'd like to see addressed in GPX 1.1:
> 1. email addresses in the <email> tag may be harvested by Web
> crawlers and start receiving spam.  Google is already displaying
the
> full contents of GPX files, exposing email addresses.
>
> 2. Someone asked for multiple URLs per waypoint/route/track a while
> back and we agreed that was a good idea.
>
> Proposed solutions:
> 1. Break <email> up into two required parts:
> <email id="dan_foster" domain="hotmail.com" />
> It should be pretty obvious how to reconstruct an email address
from
> the two parts.
>
> 2. Change <url> from "occurs zero or one times" to "occurs zero or
more times"
> While we're at it, <url> and <urlname> should get combined into one
> element with a required href attribute like this:
> <link href="http://www.cnn.com">Link to CNN Web site</link>
>
> We could add an optional <type> element to let the user specify
what
> kind of media she's linking to:
> <link href="http://www.kodak.com/my_photo.jpg">Photo of waypoint
>  <type>image/jpg</type>
> </link>
>
> Several GPX-enabled programs are linking photos to tracklogs.  At
> least one mapping program links audio files to route points to give
> voice prompts at intersections.
>
> Your thoughts?
>
> --
> Dan Foster
> TopoGrafix - GPS Software, Waypoints, and Maps
> http://www.topografix.com - mailto:egroups@t...

--- In gpsxml@yahoogroups.com, "offroute2000" <feedback@g...> wrote:
> The copyright addition implemented in GPX 1.1 looks good to me. I
> also agree with Ed that copyright information should be retained
> whenever possible. Those applications that display and perpetuate
> this information are likely to gain favorable publicity from the
> authors and publishers who originally expressed concern.
>
> Regarding merged data - how would the elements support
Ed's "retain
> it all" option?

I do support the copyright information and will display this
information in my program, but I need to turn your comment on its
head and say that those authors and publishers who release content
with liberal license terms are likely to gain favorable publicity on
my website!

I'll probably license my original trail data under the terms that it
can be charged for as part of a collection, and that distribution
can be charged for, but the data is otherwise free.

Ultimately, I think that every travel guide will include GPS data--I
think that we've got a pretty good data format for this purpose.

Dave

Dave -

That's why I qualified the statement to pertain to those "who originally
expressed concern"

I'm not lobbying for or against restrictive licensing.  I do lobby for
respecting the wishes of the data creators - that way they get to set
the rules, and the market (customers, publicists, etc.) gets to decide
which ones they like!

	 - Ed

Ed McNierney
President and Chief Mapmaker
TopoZone.com
-----Original Message-----
From: David S. Wissenbach [mailto:davewissenbach@...]
Sent: Sunday, April 18, 2004 11:32 AM
To: gpsxml@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [gpsxml] Re: copyright - GPX schema addition

--- In gpsxml@yahoogroups.com, "offroute2000" <feedback@g...> wrote:
> The copyright addition implemented in GPX 1.1 looks good to me. I also

> agree with Ed that copyright information should be retained whenever
> possible. Those applications that display and perpetuate this
> information are likely to gain favorable publicity from the authors
> and publishers who originally expressed concern.
>
> Regarding merged data - how would the elements support
Ed's "retain
> it all" option?

I do support the copyright information and will display this information
in my program, but I need to turn your comment on its head and say that
those authors and publishers who release content with liberal license
terms are likely to gain favorable publicity on my website!

I'll probably license my original trail data under the terms that it can
be charged for as part of a collection, and that distribution can be
charged for, but the data is otherwise free.

Ultimately, I think that every travel guide will include GPS data--I
think that we've got a pretty good data format for this purpose.

Dave





Yahoo! Groups Links

Hello,

Friday, April 16, 2004, 6:41:39 PM, Offroute wrote:

o> Are there any other elements in the current schema where
o> changes are currently being debated?

I'd like to see the <author> tag in the "metadata" section expanded to
include a URL, and I'd move <email> into <author>, since it's
logically connected of the author.

For example, if I publish a data file for a national park, I'd like to
be able to include a link to the park service Web site (<url> in GPX
1.0) as well as include a link to my Web site as part of the <author>
information.




--
Dan Foster
TopoGrafix - GPS Software, Waypoints, and Maps
http://www.topografix.com - mailto:egroups@...

Dear Sir / Madam,

Here is a Wonderful Part Time Home based Job Opportunity to be
executed online, exclusively meant for you to earn income every month
to change your lifestyle or to meet your daily additional
requirements, the way you want. The main features of this job are:
Home Based, No Restrictions in Timing, No Boss and No Subordinate
problems.


ASK ME FOR MORE DETAILS AND SEND E-MAIL ONLY TO THE E-MAIL ID
MENTIONED BELOW AND NOT TO MY PERSONAL E-MAIL ID:

Smart0662@...
Note:

1. Please mention in Subject as "Details requested".
2. Please don't attach   "RESUMES"

You can type advertisements that will be given to you and perform ad
typing jobs during your valuable spare time of at least 1 to 2 hours
a day at your convenience shall fetch you decent monthly returns,
without any risk.  Full training will be provided. Income based on
response.

The gift of earning money has come to you. Do grab this excellent
part time job opportunity and enjoy the benefits, if you are
interested.

For more details kindly visit
http://www.geocities.com/udaya_shre22/smartjobs.html

Regards,
SRIDEVI.A.R.

Maps on us [www.mapsonus.com]can save turn by turn lat/lon GPS
waypoint data to an html file.  It would be great if this could be
converted to gpx for importing into GPS applications like EasyGPS,
ExpertGPS, etc.
I am not a GPX developer, but I know a lot of GPS users would love a
way to import a series of waypoints into a GPS application from an
on-line trip planning application.  Mapblast, mapquest, etc., do not
have this functionality.
Thoughts anyone?

Thanks
KZ6G

Maps on us [www.mapsonus.com]can save turn by turn lat/lon GPS
waypoint data to an html file.  It would be great if this could be
converted to gpx for importing into GPS applications like EasyGPS,
ExpertGPS, etc.
I am not a GPX developer, but I know a lot of GPS users would love a
way to import a series of waypoints into a GPS application from an
on-line trip planning application.  Mapblast, mapquest, etc., do not
have this functionality.
Thoughts anyone?

Thanks
KZ6G

Hello,

Thursday, April 22, 2004, 6:37:07 PM, you wrote:

k> Maps on us [www.mapsonus.com]can save turn by turn lat/lon GPS
k> waypoint data to an html file.  It would be great if this could be
k> converted to gpx for importing into GPS applications like EasyGPS,
k> ExpertGPS, etc.

I think this would make a great standalone GPX application.

--
Dan Foster
TopoGrafix - GPS Software, Waypoints, and Maps
http://www.topografix.com - mailto:egroups@...

Try "GPS Utility" from www.gpsu.co.uk. This will import MapsOnUs files
- also MAP24, RAC, Greenflag (European) and many more sources of
geo-data. You can then load the data direct to a GPS or export as a
GPX file.

For details, please see
www.gpsu.co.uk/functions.html

Alan Murphy (author GPSU).


On 23 Apr 2004 19:51:53 -0000, you wrote:

>
>There are 3 messages in this issue.
>
>Topics in this digest:
>
>      1. Maps On Us turn-by-turn to GPS
>           From: "kz6g" <kz6g@...>
>      2. Maps On Us turn-by-turn to GPS
>           From: "kz6g" <kz6g@...>
>      3. Re: Maps On Us turn-by-turn to GPS
>           From: Dan Foster <egroups@...>
>
>
>________________________________________________________________________
>________________________________________________________________________
>
>Message: 1
>   Date: Thu, 22 Apr 2004 22:37:07 -0000
>   From: "kz6g" <kz6g@...>
>Subject: Maps On Us turn-by-turn to GPS
>
>Maps on us [www.mapsonus.com]can save turn by turn lat/lon GPS
>waypoint data to an html file.  It would be great if this could be
>converted to gpx for importing into GPS applications like EasyGPS,
>ExpertGPS, etc.
>I am not a GPX developer, but I know a lot of GPS users would love a
>way to import a series of waypoints into a GPS application from an
>on-line trip planning application.  Mapblast, mapquest, etc., do not
>have this functionality.
>Thoughts anyone?
>
>Thanks
>KZ6G
>
>
>
>________________________________________________________________________
>________________________________________________________________________
>
>Message: 2
>   Date: Thu, 22 Apr 2004 22:38:11 -0000
>   From: "kz6g" <kz6g@...>
>Subject: Maps On Us turn-by-turn to GPS
>
>Maps on us [www.mapsonus.com]can save turn by turn lat/lon GPS
>waypoint data to an html file.  It would be great if this could be
>converted to gpx for importing into GPS applications like EasyGPS,
>ExpertGPS, etc.
>I am not a GPX developer, but I know a lot of GPS users would love a
>way to import a series of waypoints into a GPS application from an
>on-line trip planning application.  Mapblast, mapquest, etc., do not
>have this functionality.
>Thoughts anyone?
>
>Thanks
>KZ6G
>
>
>
>________________________________________________________________________
>________________________________________________________________________
>
>Message: 3
>   Date: Fri, 23 Apr 2004 08:29:48 -0400
>   From: Dan Foster <egroups@...>
>Subject: Re: Maps On Us turn-by-turn to GPS
>
>Hello,
>
>Thursday, April 22, 2004, 6:37:07 PM, you wrote:
>
>k> Maps on us [www.mapsonus.com]can save turn by turn lat/lon GPS
>k> waypoint data to an html file.  It would be great if this could be
>k> converted to gpx for importing into GPS applications like EasyGPS,
>k> ExpertGPS, etc.
>
>I think this would make a great standalone GPX application.

Software Designers,

An acquaintance using my website with ExpertGPS noted that the view
waypoint on line feature of ExpertGPS didn't work properly under
certain circumstances. Debugging further, he noted that I was using
relative URL's on my web site.

The use of relative URL's is convenient for testing the web site
offline, which is why I did that. Obviously, I need to switch to
absolute URL's, so that the GPX files are portable.

One other option might be to add the equivalent of the html base tag
(or just use the html base tag) in the metadata section of the gpx
file format. The base tag furnishes the absolute portion of the URL
(host and directory) and then an application can compose an absolute
URL from the base and the relative URL. This composition too
difficult to implement--I've done this as part of my day job in less
than a day.

What does the group prefer? Canonizing the practice of using
relative URL's, or adding a base tag to the GPX standard?

Dave Wissenbach

I'm for keeping it as it is - the user should enter the entire
absolute URL.

--- In gpsxml@yahoogroups.com, "David S. Wissenbach"
<davewissenbach@y...> wrote:
> Software Designers,
>
> An acquaintance using my website with ExpertGPS noted that the
view
> waypoint on line feature of ExpertGPS didn't work properly under
> certain circumstances. Debugging further, he noted that I was
using
> relative URL's on my web site.
>
> The use of relative URL's is convenient for testing the web site
> offline, which is why I did that. Obviously, I need to switch to
> absolute URL's, so that the GPX files are portable.
>
> One other option might be to add the equivalent of the html base
tag
> (or just use the html base tag) in the metadata section of the gpx
> file format. The base tag furnishes the absolute portion of the
URL
> (host and directory) and then an application can compose an
absolute
> URL from the base and the relative URL. This composition too
> difficult to implement--I've done this as part of my day job in
less
> than a day.
>
> What does the group prefer? Canonizing the practice of using
> relative URL's, or adding a base tag to the GPX standard?
>
> Dave Wissenbach

Hello,

Tuesday, April 27, 2004, 8:33:48 AM, Dave W. wrote:

D> he noted that I was using relative URL's on my web site.

I'm also guilty of this.  I use "style.xsl" for all of my GPX
stylesheets, and just assume there's actually a stylesheet in the
directory where the file eventually ends up.

D> What does the group prefer? Canonizing the practice of using
D> relative URL's, or adding a base tag to the GPX standard?

I think you meant to write absolute in the first option, correct?

D> What does the group prefer? Canonizing the practice of using
D> *absolute* URL's, or adding a base tag to the GPX standard?

The <base href="www.mysite.com/mydir/mypage.html"> directive is
optional in HTML, and when it isn't included, the document viewer is
to assume that the base URL is the one it used to access the document.

Presumably ExpertGPS was looking in the same folder as the .gpx file
for the file you referenced with a relative URL, but the file was
still on your server.  Is that what happened?  (I'm going to assume
you've got a GPX file containing a waypoint with a link to a photo
from now on...)

Using absolute URLs always solves the file location problem, but
creates some other problems.  It means you can't move the entire file
set (gpx file and related photo) to a new directory or
server without changing all the links by hand.  It means if you
download the entire file set to your hard drive, programs will still
go out to your Web site to view the photos.  There may also be
server-side security restrictions to deal with.  (Most scripting
languages won't let you load a javascript or other file from a
different domain, as I recall)

Using relative URLs works as long as the entire file set moves
together.  In Dave's case, [again, I'm assuming] the GPX file moved
but the photo didn't.  One solution would be to distribute zipped file
sets (I believe QuakeMap already supports this), but this doesn't help
if you also plan to use and manipulate the GPX file on the server.

It seems to me that adding an optional base URL in the metadata
section doesn't hurt anything, and may help Dave and others manage
their Web sites better.  I'm in favor of adding this to GPX 1.1.

--
Dan Foster
TopoGrafix - GPS Software, Waypoints, and Maps
http://www.topografix.com - mailto:egroups@...

Hello!

As a new subscriber of this group, a question about standardisation status of
GPX. Is there any activities relating to e.g OMA (Open Mobile Alliance) or any
other forums. Who is responsiple of changes if DTD needs to maintained?

cheers

Mike


---------------------------------
   Yahoo! Messenger - Communicate instantly..."Ping" your friends today! Download
Messenger Now

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Hello,

Wednesday, April 28, 2004, 9:07:15 AM, Mike wrote:

M> As a new subscriber of this group, a question about standardisation status of
GPX. Is there any activities relating to e.g OMA (Open Mobile Alliance) or any
other forums. Who is responsiple of
M> changes if DTD needs to maintained?

The GPX schema is hosted on topografix.com, and I update it as changes
are approved.  GPX 1.0 has been complete and locked for about a year.
We're wrapping up the changes to GPX 1.1 now.

Early on, we decided to focus on getting GPX into use, rather than
push for its adoption in one of the standards committees.  If you'd
like to lead an effort to get it certified, I'm sure there would be
people on the GPX list willing to help you.

--
Dan Foster
TopoGrafix - GPS Software, Waypoints, and Maps
http://www.topografix.com - mailto:egroups@...

--- In gpsxml@yahoogroups.com, Dan Foster <egroups@t...> wrote:

> The GPX schema is hosted on topografix.com, and I update it as
changes
> are approved.  GPX 1.0 has been complete and locked for about a
year.
> We're wrapping up the changes to GPX 1.1 now.

Given that the latest ExpertGPS build saves to 1.1 is that an
indication that 1.1 is wrapped up?

I need to get to work to update my MapPoint plug-in as it barfs on
1.1 files...

Don
http://homepage.mac.com/donreith/gpxExchange/