We've Improved Our Profiles


Forum » General Forums » Mapping

By TallPaul on 31/03/17 at 2:46pm

Which are display when you click the "Profile" link on a track2 or route1. Essentially we've gone from this:

to this:

See our blog post here for more details.

  1. A route describes where you are intending to go, point by point. For more information click here.
  2. A track records where you have been and when you were there. For more information click here.

By saraofglencoe on 25/05/17 at 7:19am

The new profile looks much better, thank you! One other request though.... After uploading a track, at the moment the profile box can't be resized, so it is necessary to scroll right to see the whole track profile unfold - about 12-13km is visible initially. Would it be possible to make the box resizable, so I can see the profile for the whole walk on the screen? (this is for record keeping, as I like to include a screen shot of my walk data in my digital photo album).


By Lancashire Lad on 15/06/17 at 8:58pm

. . . After uploading a track, at the moment the profile box can't be resized, so it is necessary to scroll right to see the whole track profile unfold - about 12-13km is visible initially. Would it be possible to make the box resizable, so I can see the profile for the whole walk on the screen? . . . .

I was just having a look at some of my GPX track profiles, and had exactly the same thoughts!

If the pop-up profile box could possibly be made user resizable, or alternatively, if that's not possible, perhaps it might be possible to slightly reduce the width between each distance measurement so that the entire route might be seen, rather than part of the route, that would be perfect.

Best regards, Mike.


By TallPaul on 16/06/17 at 10:36am

This one has been puzzling me for a while as I'd been unable to re-produce it but last night I was reading your post while lying on the sofa with my Chromebook and took a look from there and there is was. The issue, it turns out, was that you had a wider browser window than I habitually use (probably because you open your browsers full screen which I don't on my desktop ... but do on my Chromebook).

A browser window wider than about 1250 pixels triggered the behaviour of the popup window being narrower than the profile image. Anyway I've now "fixed" this however I think it would be worth me looking at this in more depth to see if I can get re-sizing to work in a sane manner.

But that will take longer.


By Lancashire Lad on 16/06/17 at 1:15pm

Hi Paul,

Certainly, in my case, I'm viewing with the web-page "maximised" to full screen, on a monitor with screen size set to 1920 pixel resolution across its width.

So yes, you've obviously hit the nail on the head, and I can confirm, having just tried looking at one of my tracks, (23.8km in length), that the complete track profile from start to finish of walk now shows.

Whereas previously, the profile pop-up showed the first 12.5km with a left/right scroll tab to show the remainder.

Thanks for the fix - much appreciated!

Regards, Mike.


By moz59 on 25/06/17 at 9:51pm

Hmmm,

This is still not right.

Apologies for using examples way out of the Lakes but this is our summer post-work walking!

I've added three attachments. A GPX file of a walk we did at the end of last month and screen dumps of the walk from the end of March (when I did my initial planning) and from yesterday (when I used the improved/fixed profile).

There are several things I will comment on: Most importantly the "new" profile loses the last 1.5km of the walk; the vertical exaggeration is reduced (perhaps not too much of an issue but it doesn't use the full availability of the scale); I feel the old profile is a more accurate representation of the real world - in particular there is a sharp drop in the new profile which I don't feel reflects the reality of walk as we did it.

Oh, and finally both screen captures were done on the same display - a Dell U2713 2560x1440 flat screen but were most definitely not done on full screen - I resize the browser to approximately best fit the route I'm displaying

Mark


By TallPaul on 26/06/17 at 9:55am

Thanks for highlighting this. It turns out that profiles for route1s (but not track2s) were being misrepresented in two ways:

  1. Although the whole route profile was shown the horizontal axis was being mis-labelled. This got worse the more route points you added.

  2. The sampling method for routes, where the distance between points is generally longer than for tracks, could lead to oddities like your excessive gradient.

Both of these I've now addressed and your route profile now looks like this which seems more plausible:

  1. A route describes where you are intending to go, point by point. For more information click here.
  2. A track records where you have been and when you were there. For more information click here.

By moz59 on 26/06/17 at 9:50pm

Many thanks Paul; looking at this week's walk it seems to have got the distance right now. (the slope is not so obviously wrong on this one). I just need to re-generate all the screen dumps I did over the weekend!

Mark



WalkLakes recognises that hill walking, or walking in the mountains, is an activity with a danger of personal injury or death.
Participants in these activities should be aware of and accept these risks and be responsible for their own actions.