Objects with same name

BaseCame does not have folders as you think of folders in the finder. I assume that is why they renamed them lists. The list are an organization tool, like an album in iTunes. In the finder, files move from folder to folder. In BaseCamp all geodata objects, (waypoints, tracks, geocaches, and routes) are stored in MyCollection and the list just contains a pointer, or alias to the file. In my opinion, the iTunes approach has proven to be the best approach for managing geodata and it requires unique names for each object.

iTunes does allow for many objects to have the same "Name": they are differentiated using OID's and meta-data.

List's are fine but I'm with Antonio, we need to be able to have multiple objects with the same name without BaseCamp renaming them. If BaseCamp isn't using OID's, it needs to.

Cheers,

What are you defining as objects - waypoints, tracks, and routes? Are you including the symbol so you can name waypoints with different symbols the same? I would think the developers added extra code to keep from confusing users. Each object is probable identified by an ID number. I think there are many more features that should be ahead on the project. I also think it would cause confusion for the average user and hurt BaseCamp reviews.

You must not be talking about waypoints and tracks because BaseCamp allows you to give a Route the same name as a waypoint.

What are you defining as objects - waypoints, tracks, and routes? Are you including the symbol so you can name waypoints with different symbols the same? When you consider the investment in coding hours to implement, I think there are many more features that should be ahead on the project. I also think it would cause confusion for the average user and hurt BaseCamp reviews.

Well, I think we'll just have to disagree on this topic.

I talk to a lot of people that won't touch BaseCamp because of this point (and a few others).

Your Object question is a good one for the BC Team.

What is an Object in BC? If no object orientation, what are the primary Data Types, Keys, etc? Any data type that can be user defined should be an object to BaseCamp as far as I'm concerned and I actually expected this to be a fundamental aspect of the data architecture. In my 35 years as a systems architect I've never seen a case where forcing naming convention upon users has been a "desired" feature. That's why we invented data types, object types, keys, OIDs, etc.

As for cost, I realize that folks with very little data in their My Collection will not find this issue of much import but it seems to me that getting the fundamentals of the data architecture right for long term growth and broad user acceptance is as important as any user feature.

Cheers,

I would bet there is nothing wrong with the database and the name is not the unique identifier so it probable took extra coding to keep the name unique. I would like BC to have more fields viewable in a list, some user definable and have BC assign the state or province abbreviation. If you had more information at a glance the name is not so importance but with only a symbols available the user is better off if they have a naming convention. When I select a song in iTunes I see a Album, Name, Artist, etc so the name is not so important. If I have two waypoints with the same name and symbol I don't want to have to double click the object to determine which object is the which. Until we get more fields, there is nothing wrong with a friendly disagreement. I know if you download POI of all the cracker barrel when you view on the map you don't care about a unique name but you are portable going to download from a POI site and they will have a unique name. If they have as state Cracker Barrel and numbered from north to south you can collect the in smart list and have and ideal from the list which part of the state they are located.

I do agree with Dan

I obviously do agree with Dan. I've been in the IT industries for over a decade too and I'm sure that objects or whatever they are should surely have a unique ID different from their name, let's call it identifier, ObjectsID or whatever. I understand Basecamp is organized like itunes and not like a file-system, but in my opinion it should be possible to create two objects with the same name. Let's make another example: let's talk about waypoints, ant let's take a peak of a mountain. The mountain has a common name, let's call it "high". Let's assume you have three mountains called the same in italy. I must call them differently, for example "tuscany-high", "sicily-high", "lazio-high". I instead would like to have three different list for organizing my waypoints, one for tuscany, one for sicily and one for lazio. In each list i want a different waypoint, but with the same name. The mountain is called "high", how should I call it ? I don't see any abvious reason to call it differently.
just my 2cents

Thanks for the feedback. Many of the uniqueness constraints are set by how the device treats waypoints. Even if BaseCamp let you set different objects to the same name, the device won't. Your three points will become 1.

As for list names inside of folders, we'll take a look at what we can do.

Thanks for the feedback. Many of the uniqueness constraints are set by how the device treats waypoints. Even if BaseCamp let you set different objects to the same name, the device won't. Your three points will become 1.

You of course are correct about the GPS not allowing Waypoints with the same name. But I thought Garmin devices actually just append numerical tags to the end of the name and save them? Much like happens when one "Saves to Favorites" multiple on-device POI's with the same name on the GPS.

Which leads me to question, how does the GPS handle reading/indexing multiple POI's with the same name?

Cheers,

It is probable the Garmin POI Loader app that is appending the numbers. I would think the GPS is probable using the name to identify the record and therefore must be unique. What makes naming to waypoints the same a need feature? I would think the three mountains named "high" will already be on the map. If you click the add waypoint icon, BC will append need numbers. Would it not be more useful to name the mount high-nearest city?

First, POILoader does no such thing. It "compresses" the information that it is given. Along with allowing the user to set proximity alerts on each POI. POI's have no such naming constraint. The POILoader does have issues but at least is doesn't dictate naming convention.

Try using your GPS to search for [POI] Wendy's in your area. You will get multiple of the Same Name. Why? Because they are what they are. It's not "Wendy's at the corner of 4th and Main". It is just Wendy's. As are the rest of the 3641 Wendy's in the US. The differentiator is the Lat/Lon and the "other" attribute data associated with the Name.

Back to Antonio's example:

He wants to name High Mountains across his area and one might assume Medium Mountains and Low Mountains. So, now Antonio wants to go for a ride the includes ALL High Mountains near him. How does he easily select all High Mountains if the Name is not the identifier?

Let's get more complex. I'm a cyclist. I have all of the Category Climbs logged as waypoints for the Tour de France. There are hundred's of CAT climbs in 3200km. I just would like to see all Cat-5 waypoints near me. The only way to do this is to make them POI's because the GPS's can't support multiple waypoints of the same name.

It is the Garmin GPS device that has this built-in limitation. Why this arbitrary convention was chosen by Garmin is unclear but I expect it was limitations of the S/W & H/W technology from many years ago which has been carried over to today.

Many of us would like the device to manage our data with "modern" data management techniques. Unfortunately for us, Garmin devices don't do that. As much as I like what they do do, their approach in this area is quite arcane.

That condition unfortunately dictates much of what BaseCamp and other computer based programs can do with data (waypoints, routes, tracks).

Cheers,