Custom POI Standards

I would believe that the more info included, the better.

Frankly, if I find a "free" POI listing and wanted to make it better to suit my own specific needs, I'd simply modify it or just keep my mouth shut

Custom = Standard??? I must be too logical.

(I guess there's a critic in every crowd!)

Well at the moment, we've got 3 or 4 columns, with col4. containing arbitrary text.

It's a flexible standard. You could add any field you want to your data (along with its header). If you could convince other people it was generally useful, they would use it too.

Well, I don't think it's best, from a Technical point of view - but it meets the requirement of being easy to work with.

What I'm suggesting, is that field 4 is left as arbitrary text - that might serve some useful purpose for someone ... probably the file's author. The actual data would be stored in other (labelled) columns.

Say you were working in Excel. You could store all the address components in their own columns and have a simple function that appended them together with a linebreak to go in column 4.

Consider a parallel: In the Outlook Express Address Book, you add a "First Name" , "Middle name" and a "Last name". It then generates a default "Display Name" from them (that you can override if you wish).
Within Outlook Express, you're only seeing the "Display Name".
But, if you export that data, the component parts are kept separate ... very useful, if for example, you want to sort it by "Last Name".

Going back to POIs: If all the POI data is just text within column 4 - how do you separate it out, for the occasions when that would be useful?

(GeePeeEx Editor currently has 14 rules, purely to recognise telephone numbers!)

Maybe something is being lost in the translation across the pond. Stating that a field can contain any arbitrary text that you want to put there is NOT a standard. The "standard" ends where things stop being clearly defined.

We are discussing, I thought, what form and content should be present in files uploaded HERE. Your proposal says that there should be only 3 "standard" fields and I think there should be at least ONE more. I agree that the LAST field probably should be arbitrary (commonly called NOTES) but I don't think that should be field 4.

What you may or may not do with the copy that you obtained is interesting maybe......but a different discussion. You can use field numbers 4 thru 50 for your own purposes; I don't care as long as you don't upload it HERE.

This is part of the problem as I and several others see it.

The example above is part of what some folks have trouble working with. Without looking up each individual coordinate you have no idea of what McDonalds are in the area you are looking for.

If I download a file from POI Factory that contains all McDonalds in the US and Canada and for space considerations I want to cut it down in size. I realize I will never visit Rhode Island and want to eleminate all McDonalds in Rhode Island, I can't without a lot of effort.

If we have a Guideline/Standard that for "commercial" locations we include the City for ease of use we can customize our POI's for our use.

For the example given:

-149.8535,61.2295,McDonalds - Columbus OH
-148.5835,65.4479,McDonalds - Cleveland OH
-161.8235,67.2179,McDonalds - Dayton OH


The city/state are part of the title for each individual location. Makes it easier to use even if the Guidline/Standard does not go into a 4th column.

"Golllllly", will we ever have a mess if they incorporate EVERY suggestion and idea posted in this thread!! Aren't we getting a little carried away? At this rate no one will author POIs ... it will be way too complicated.

RT

I believe the most important point is ease of creating POI files. The value here comes from the content, so putting forth a mandatory standard could diminish the overall value by discouraging contributions from new members.

One idea that might help is creating site-based tools for maintaining POI files. The My locations tool is a good example. I'd love to see this extended to shareable POI files.

This way formatting rules could be selected by the person downloading the file, while the input would be well structured.

I agree and I believe my proposal could address it. For arguments sake - let's say I don't want the location as part of the name..and you do.

If the file had been uploaded to POI-Factory with the optional components separated out (city, state etc), a script could generate a version of the file that meets both our requirements. The file would have had to have the (agreed) headers added to identify the data:

"Lon","Lat","Name","Default","City","State"
-149.8535,61.2295,McDonalds",,"Columbus","OH"
-148.5835,65.4479,McDonalds",,"Cleveland","OH"
-161.8235,67.2179,McDonalds",,"Dayton","OH"


(I'm sure you see how such a script (or Excel on your PC) could now generate a new version of the file, in either format).

The essence of the proposal, is that the uploaded data doesn't actually meet anyone's exact requirement - but because the data is separated out, it can be made to.

The possible inclusion of a default 'col 4' would just to provide some kind of a fallback, for the situation where no further processing was available.

I just uploaded a new POI using the 4 column format of LON,LAT,NAME,Address-phone.

-75.7511991 39.683112 CalTort - Newark "55 E Main St Newark, DE 19711 (302) 292-2910"

I think this is the format everyone is looking for. The 4th column can be added to the 3rd in a 3-step operation in Excel for conversion to those units that only use 3 columns. However, trying to take a 3 column format with the name, address and phone data and converting it to a 4 column format is nigh impossible.

To combine columns 3 and 4, you use column 5(E) and the following function =concatenate(c1," ",d1). Copy the formula to each row.

Select Column E and do a COPY. With Column E still selected, do a Paste - Special, Values. This takes the data from the formula and writes it as the value rather than the formula.

Select Columns C and D and delete the columns. Column E is now Column C with all the data.

You have converted a 4 column CSV file to a 3 column CSV.

I have just uploaded a POI file the meets what I believe are the "standardized" requirements. The 4 columns used are LON, LAT, NAME, ADDRESS-Phone

-75.7511991 39.683112 CalTort - Newark "55 E Main St Newark, DE 19711 (302) 292-2910"

This file can be converted from 4 column format to a 3 column format using a 3-step process in Excel.

In Row 1, Column E enter the following function:
=concatenate(C1," ",D1). Copy the function to each row.

Select Column E and perform a COPY. With Column E still selected perform a PASTE-Special, Values. This copies the value returned from the function and saves it as the data

Select Columns C and D. Delete the columns. Column E is now Column C.

Trying to convert a 3 column format to 4 column is nigh impossible due to the free form nature of the data.

Or column 4 can easily be combined with column 3 using POI Verifier II. (For TomTom users, this is done automatically when converting to ov2 format with The Verifier.)

RT

But can POI Verifier convert a 3 column to a 4 column CSV for Garmin?

A standard does not have to be rigid like that. It could state a set of minimum requirements, than some recommended optional features with best practices.

You're onto something here. Assuming we want to establish a standard that caters to as many POIF users as possible, we have to know what are the limitations of each conversion software, and compatibility with each GPSr. An information that is dropped or loads but is not displayed is OK, but if it crashes the unit or I have to spend 20 minutes everytime to make it suitable to my devices, that's not OK.

I personally prefer GPX format. I bit harder to work with but once you've defined a working template, it's just cut and paste from there. GPX is extensible and the content of each field is clearly stated.

But is it supported by all make of GPSr? That brings me to my comment above, who supports what?

Simon

Get real! You can't convert 3 fields to 4 fields when you don't know what's in field 3.

What YOU said was "To combine columns 3 and 4, you use .....". POI Verifier/II can combine field 3 and field 4!

RT

No, GPX is not supported by everybody. I believe that .csv IS, to some degree, supported by all (major) brands.

With Magellan, I have had only 2 signigicant problems with stuff posted here.....as a .CSV:

For us, the NAME field must be unique for each entry
AND
Having more than one "line" in a field is a royal pain in the butt......which normally causes me to just drop that field altogether.

Here is my thoughts on this; Some people create POI's for themselves, they are willing to share them with members of this forum, putting certain standards in affect is just like telling those people that if they want to be generous and share there POI's they have to work harder and add more information! I think that may effect the number of POI files contributed here! I think if standards are applied, there should be a space within the POI factory just for these shared files, i.e. (files without addresses and phone numbers). If any member wants to download one of these files onto there GPS, they know what to expect!

If this standard goes into affect, Maybe Miss POI could add another link for POI's that do not meet certain standards!

RT, we appreciate the effort you've put in creating POIVerifier, but could you post comments more constructive than "Use my app"?

I know that I'm not sold on .csv files so I'd rather stick to free software to edit them.

Simon

Once the design format is hammered out, I think it would be helpful to create a "Custom POI Design Spreadsheet". The spreadsheet can show a sample line and an example of how to properly format and fill out each column.

There can be a dialogue box immediately below the sample line telling the designer the rules/instructions/ on how to complete the spreadsheet in order for the end result to be correct and compliant to the new standard. The dialogue box could explain the following:

How to format each column for proper display on GPS
What to put in each column and in which order
When to use commas
Spreadsheet naming
Anything else appropriate

This design spreadsheet can be accessible on POIFactory and it can communicated that this is the preferred format for all new spreadsheets. Once everyone understands the requirement and follows this standard, then software like POI verifier II work properly and infomatation is properly displayed on the GPS for the users.

It should not be that difficult to get everyone to comply once they realize the benefits from using the uniform standard and it is presented to them properly. I think in most cases everyone looks for direction and is willing to follow once they understand a common goal. Thank you for listening!

I'm not telling you to "Use my app"; those are you're words, not mine. If I know of an easier way to accomplish what's trying to be done, I'll continue to post it ... being my app or anybody elses. Isn't that one of the reasons for this website??

Now if we want to talk about a post that isn't "constructive", shall we look at yours??

RT

... afraid you'd say that.

From my point of view, .csv is an archaic, limited format that can contain limited information per entry.

GPX files can contain a lot more, and I believe it would be easier to write a program/script/web routine to drop some info from a GPX and downgrade it to a .csv, than going the other way around. (how can you add info that's not there?)

Simon

RT, I apologize if I offended you. Let's quell the flames here. I'll stay on topic.

Simon

I find .csv format perfect for my use.
They require significantly less memory than .gpx files.
The majority of files I download I modify by stripping out info I never use -
I rarely am interested in ZIP codes, telephone numbers.
And just so people don't think I'm a stay at home - we take 4-5 trips per year in the 4,000 to 8000 mile range - so we use the PIO's quite often.

And, I also find RT's past (and most probably future) inputs to this forum extremely useful and his particular software application has been extremely cost effective and useful to many POI Factory file contributors for the pittance it costs. I use it for my updates to insure POI Factory users are getting a QUALITY file.

Each individual typically has different likes & dislikes, wants & needs - maybe some people should walk in the footsteps of the past major contributors of this site - they have done a significant service.

My 3 cents worth !

As I read the posts there are many different types of users here. I think that we would all agree that we do not want to discourage anyone from contributing material to the site. We all have different technical backgrounds, and sometimes see problems in certain areas of file creation that others don't realize, or that there are solutions already available.

My personal goal in participating in this thread and website is to help others get the most of their gpsr. I have had the privilage of helping many members solve their problems over the phone and via private email. I love being able to do that.

I do not have programming experience, but do help maintain the network and all software beta testing at work.

We need to look for a way to make files on this site easy to create and update, similar in content format and easy to use. If we have a format so that files are the same structure, then software that is already available, or that could be created, would allow users of different gpsr companies units can use them easier.

An example has already been shown. If I have a file of say 200 X store locations, and they are all named the same (X STORE), then some users will have to spend time changing the file before it can be used on their gps. But if I knew that I needed to have column 3 unique when I created the file, it would take only a few seconds longer per line and serve more people.

These are my thoughts and look forward to more suggestions and ideas.

Daniel

You look up the additional information and YOU add it! (Sorry, couldn't resist!)

Your point of view is, no doubt, correct.....for YOU.

I think we are getting a little off the track here.

From MY point of view, I see nothing wrong with posting a file in whatever format that the creating user finds the most useful.......be it a GPX or whatever. I just think that he/she should also post a "standard" CSV version and agree to maintain both.

This site has an ever widening audience. I'm willing to bet that a LOT of the existing and potential users won't even be bothered with USER POI files unless they are "plug-in appliance" easy.......and/or come with an easy set of instructions. I'm also willing to bet that most of the folks who find the whole thing just TOO intimidating don't bother to leave a comment to that effect either.

I think THAT (ease and simplicity of use and appeal to the widest audience) should be the ultimate goal.

It IS possible to cater to the widest audience of rookie users with a variety of models AND to the dominant Garmin community without slighting either.

[/off soapbox]

That's what I do, for the files I create as it is easier to do then. For files from others, I tweak them if I have the time, otherwise I use them as is. The only annoying thing is that you have to redo it at every update, or live with outdated info.

Maybe then the first oder of business would be to establish guidelines on how to post your files, so that we can easily search and see right away which area is covered and which information is included.

Simon

And that would take us......right back to where the discussion started.....or so I thought.

I was just curious to see how long you think it will take to develop the POI standard/guidelines and get it posted so everyone can begin using it for their POI development?

I guess with the holiday season coming it will have to wait until at least the 1st or 2nd quarter of 2009.

We are still hammering out which direction we want to go before we make any announcements to the community.

We will be working on this as our next big project, but we need to make sure our ideas are possible before we get everyone excited.

We had two previous ideas which turned into databases that we are now not using. So we are not going to be rushing into spending many hours programing something that we will eventually throw out when it is more work then it is worth.

I can tell you that our ideas will be thinking outside the box and will launch us into the future and help with any changes that this industry might throw at us.

Miss POI

The same goes for Starbucks

That sounds great and is well thought out. Forward thinking is definitely required in an industry that is changing so rapidly.

I am excited about the overall end result and the impact it will have on future users. I know this will help maximize the capabilities of the GPS and the combined input by everyone will only increase the success of this project.

Great Job!

How are legacy POI posts going to be handled that are not in compliance with the adopted standard?

There could be a couple solutions. Software or manual. There are some here smart enough to do them automatically. It will really depend on how the csv file will change. But one thing that I have done on projects in the past is have several folks work on little bits. With enough help, it is not hard to do several hunderd lines a day. Work on the files one by one.

An example I am working on is the Krispy Kreme file. There are several locations that I know are wrong based on sat images. I plan on asking for help from members that have been there to confirm my guesses.

Daniel

Hi All

I believe some effort should be made to ensure name uniqueness in the name field as my 3250 rejects dup named records.

• Append the record #
• Append Street Addy
• Etc.

An alternative would be to not encode the name as unique and append separated phone & addy info, record # etc. That would allow sorts on various columns and facilitate state, county, city/town breakouts.

Col 4 in the hosted file would remain empty to reserve it for the user to populate as desired.

I am not sure if this comment should go into this forum, but I kind of think so. My point is really about the quality of the POI, especially the coordinates.

I have found in some of the POI files that the coordinates are incorrect. And that they can be off with a number of miles. So if I know before a trip that I will use a POI, I always try to verify the coordinates at home. I am using GeePeeEx, wikipedia and Google Maps to check that the coordinates looks to point to a location that seems to match the name/description/address/city. Getting miles off track out on the road would be a very frustrating experience.

I understand that if you have a file with thousands of addresses that you batch geocode, then you can't be expected to verify every resulting coordinate on the map.

I am not sure how this problem can be addressed. I for sure do not want to discourage anybody from submitting POI files. But if there was a way that a file could be verified by one person instead of everyone that wants to use that file doing it.

I am hoping that you smart people have some views on this.

Also so I hope that you understand that I'm not out to criticize. I am totally amazed about this site. The number of people contributing files, the time and effort people give up to create those file. And of top of that you can get help and advice on anything related to GPSr and navigation (and sometimes beyond).

I also find the tone of the forum is at a nice level. Since there seems to be mostly guys talking about their toys here, it could have gone quite another direction. I am sure having Miss Poi as a moderator is a big help making people play nice.

JCA

I just looked at the POI for casinos in the US because I wanted to plan a trip to Colorado and go to a couple of casinos near Cripplecreek. Well, I opened the spreadsheet and guess what, no city and state. I appreciate the effort it took to compile this data, however, how are you supposed to use it with no city and state?

The standards can't come too soon!

After reading all the ideas about setting up standards for the site.Many good comments and ideas.But don't we already have a standard in place?The internal pois in each of our gps units include the needed information.Name,address,zip code and telephone number.We should just be following the same standard already set.In my case Garmin.I don't see why you would put the city in column 3 with the name when all that information is already in column 4.When you touch the custom poi you want to go to all the information you need to know is there if you used the same format provided with your unit.I don't think we need to put a lot of extra work doing pois that will result in turning off the members to submit pois.It would be nice and I seen this on another site when you download a file to your computer you can select the type of gps you have and it will download file to your computer in the needed format including gpx.

Charles,

I think the need for more information in a POI File stems from the desire of many users to cut down the size of POI files they download to thier GPS. Imagine downloading tons of POI's that are of interest to you, but you know that you are never going to travel out of a 4 state area, why have details of for instance all Wal-Mart stores in the other 46 states?

At some point you may want only information that you are going to use on your GPS.

Others may have a desire to have all franchises for McDonalds on thier PC, but with the additional information it allows you the downloader to bring in only the locations you need.

I hope this helps clarify the desire of some of us. Others may have different reasons.

As a person who has created and uploaded files, yes it takes a bit more to add the additional information, but it makes the files more useful to more people with some basic information in there.

I see what you are saying but to be honest customizing all the poi files for x amount of users.How many really would take the time to sort them out by state and make a extra file when it is so easy to just download them all at one time.Not sure input would equal output.Miss poi made a good point about developing something that does not get used.I will be more then happy to go with the majority but to me the most important thing we can do to improve the custom poi files is not to allow files with just the coordinates and the name.

It's just not putting the city in Col 3, it's about putting in enough info so as you search and are presented with 5 or 6 of the same POI you have an idea where one is located. I recently updated a file with close to 10 locations in the Boston area. Having a search on that POI give me 10 names, a straight line distance and a little direction area doesn't help me decide which to visit. If I'm going to meet someone and they say let's meet at the Mickey's over by the University, how are you going to know which of the 10 is the right one without some info in Col 3 other than a name?

Maybe my unit shows information different.For example if I want to go to Sonnys.It shows the closest 50 to me.When I touch one of the custom pois I see the name and complete address with the phone number.What else do I need?Putting information in column 3 I already have in column 4 is duplication.I can see it for maybe a Tom Tom unit.I don't own one but based on posts they use 3 columns for data and some posts say that is limited so there is a need there.Don't want to start any uproar here but if I input the data for custom pois along the same lines as the internal pois and it is good enough for Garmin I am good to go.My question still is there really that many members who need that change and does it justify visiting every file and adding extra information.I do a lot of travelling since I am retired and using the present method has never caused me a problem.Like I say what ever the majority wants.But it needs to be clear is there a need for the majority and will it be used.I have my doubts.

I know it has been said several times before, but the inexpensive program, POI Verifier, easily separates POIs by state from the Lat/Lon data, so I don't see the necessity of having the state data.
When I am using the file within my GPSr, the appropriate POI is found within a certain distance from my location.
It is useful to have a phone number, and definitely useful for the name to be unique.

I always look at the spreadsheet to see what states the POI's are in. This helps me know if I even want to add it. Some of these POI's take a lot of space and I have to be selective about which ones I use. The city and state really help me.

That's because the Custom POI you are looking at was created by someone who took the time to add the Address and Phone Number.

Try loading some of the examples folks have listed here such as the custom POI for Malls of America or Bahama Breeze POI or POI for casinos in the US. These have been cited by others in this discussion as examples. If you load any one of these see if they still come up with Address and Phone Number.

My 2 cents. I would prefer a quality POI file which conforms to standards and is accurate versus a POI file which is slapped together.

I have downloaded quite a few files from this site which contain horribly inaccurate coordinates and information. A POI standard would not ensure that files contain correct coordinates/information, but at least it would force the creator to spend a little extra time to create the file and thus hopefully make a better product.

That is the exact point I am making.Just do the custom pois like the standard set up in our units.Don't need for Poifactory to set up anything special to do this.We already have a standard.Evey file that is submitted the first time goes through Miss Poi.If it don't have the information it does not get added.Easy fix to me.Now their will always be exceptions to the rule like if someone has a location for example Lake Tahoe with the city and state you will not have a phone number for it.Who would want the phone number for a rest stop?Speed and Red light cameras etc.If a business it should include all the info.Using google maps for custom pois eliminate all these problems.When you put in the information to search for address or business name and save it.Everything including coordinates,address,phone number is saved in one step and to me a lot faster then a spread sheet.

That sir is one of the purposes of a standard. It sets both mandatory and optional items.

From the discussion so far on this thread it appears we have only agreed the first 2 columns must contain lat/long data. The options cover columns 3 and 4. The only other mandatory item is there must be 3 columns at a minimum. Some feel the fourth column is not needed, others say it should contain this info and still other units such as Tom-Tom only use 3.

Does that imply we need to make 2 files, one with 4 columns and one with 3?

Most of us on this thread are barking up the same tree, just some of us are on opposite sides:). We want to make accurate files that many can use with little problems. I do not use or own a TomTom, Mio, Navigon or Magellan. If there is some thing that I can do when I create a file so they can use it, so be it. We want to be aware of those with units that have limited space.

What I think I am hearing is that column three needs to be unique. It needs to have the store name. Then the state, city or street. If there is only one location in town - then the towns name should suffice. If more than one in town a street name would be nice. It probably needs to be less than 20 charactors for the 3.5" displays.

If available the store address and phone number in column 4. This helps if the coordinates are off to try and find it the old way or call for directions.

Daniel

All POIs should have 4 fields. If you have a GPS that reads 4 fields and I have a model that only reads 3 fields, why should you be forced to downsize to my requirements.

Make them all 4 fields. There is software that will combine fields 3 and 4, remove field 4 if not needed, or 'suck' out the phone number from field 4 and combine it with field 3 for phone dialing (POI Verifier II).

RT

I agree it should be 4 columns.Someone suggested this same idea to me thru email about putting information in column 3.Adding city with the name.Not trying to be negative about it I loaded if up on my c340.What I found was once I increased info in line 3 and touch my custom poi to view what info showed.The name and city showed up just fine but the info that I wanted to see in column four was now limited in what I could now view.This may be a different story for other models I haven't tried it on my other one but if you have a c340 that will be the results.

Is there any standard on POI's with alerts? It's hard to tell when you download the file if it is setup for the alarm or alert.

The only POI that come standard with an alert trigger are the camera ones. All the others require you to manually set the alert when you load them using POILoader. Make certain POILoader is in manual mode, then you can set an alert based on speed or distance. In order to trigger the alert, the location of the POI needs to be on your route of travel and within 25 feet or so of the road - that's what is meant by "on your route." You will not get an alert for a POI that is a 100 feet from the route unless you create a special file called a TourGuide.