GSAK Logging Macros

[PesceVerde]

This series of posts was split from another thread as this discussion was veering off to concepts not applicable to the original topic.
c@w


If doing a number of caches I sometimes take along my eeePC with GSAK and preloaded recent cache info. etc for easy reference,
and usually put a Notepad file on the desktop to 'jot' down my thoughts after each cache before they drift off to wherever lost thoughts drift off to.

[ian-and-penny]

If doing a number of caches I sometimes take along my eeePC with GSAK and preloaded recent cache info. etc for easy reference,
and usually put a Notepad file on the desktop to 'jot' down my thoughts after each cache before they drift off to wherever lost thoughts drift off to.

Instead of Notepad, have a look at this Log Template macro:

Then follow it up with Upload Field Notes

[CraigRat]

I find these automates 'x of x finds' logs without any mention of the cache to be WORSE than a hand written TNLN log.

It encourages lazy logging.

Not that anyone in this thread would be that lazy, just saying....

[Mr Router]

I find these automates 'x of x finds' logs without any mention of the cache to be WORSE than a hand written TNLN log.

It encourages lazy logging.

Not that anyone in this thread would be that lazy, just saying....

remember "constructive"

[ian-and-penny]

We have a bluetooth GPS but I have found it a bit clunky, we just use the Oregon.

You could try these macros:

Colorado Export (Beta) Works with Oregons too.

Field Notes Import & Log

[Team Rubik]

I find these automates 'x of x finds' logs without any mention of the cache to be WORSE than a hand written TNLN log.

It encourages lazy logging.

Not that anyone in this thread would be that lazy, just saying....

I must agree. While a number of my close caching friends use this macro, nothing disappoints me more than logs that differ in find number (why does the cache owner care?) and differs by one or two words from the others that were logged on the same day. I have also seen logs where the comments are critical of the cache and the auto-generated notes thank the owner greatly for the caching experience!

If you wish to make regular use of this macro the please consider how will you be judged - laziness? A lack of creativity? Cheap verbosity stats? Insincerity?

[andiamo]

While the log macro has the facility to state xx find of xxx etc, this can be disabled and you can write individual logs in the style you prefer. We find it useful when we have a number of finds as it is easier to write something just after you have visited the cache, rather than later that night when you are weary.

[ian-and-penny]

I must agree. While a number of my close caching friends use this macro, nothing disappoints me more than logs that differ in find number (why does the cache owner care?) <snip> If you wish to make regular use of this macro the please consider how will you be judged - laziness? A lack of creativity? Cheap verbosity stats? Insincerity?

I must admit I'm sometimes guilty of "boilerplate" logs. Yes I use a template, but I always try to write something special in the middle of the text that that reflects my experience at the cache. Of course, sometimes that is not possible, maybe I have a cr@p memory, or maybe it's the cache that is not memorable enough.

Consider too if I go out caching an area and 90% of my days finds have been hidden by the same person (and if they are a series) then my experience from cache to cache isn't going to be much different - and my logs will surely reflect this. Can the same comments (laziness, lack of creativity, cheapness, stats, insincerity, etc) apply to the hide as well as the find?

In the end we're all different, we all appreciate a well written log, but not everyone can write a good story unaided - indeed some need all the help they can get.

[Big Matt and Shell]

I find these automates 'x of x finds' logs without any mention of the cache to be WORSE than a hand written TNLN log.

It encourages lazy logging.

Not that anyone in this thread would be that lazy, just saying....

I must agree. While a number of my close caching friends use this macro, nothing disappoints me more than logs that differ in find number (why does the cache owner care?) and differs by one or two words from the others that were logged on the same day. I have also seen logs where the comments are critical of the cache and the auto-generated notes thank the owner greatly for the caching experience!

If you wish to make regular use of this macro the please consider how will you be judged - laziness? A lack of creativity? Cheap verbosity stats? Insincerity?

Hi guys, I think your taking this out of context, our logs always have followed a format. I'm not suggesting people use this as a copy and paste log, I think I have been clear enough on that on another post. What I'm going to use it for is to speed up my log making. At present I need to use a mixture of GSAK and field notes to be able to personally thank the cache owners as the field notes don't show the cache owners name. For the rest of the log I'll be able to write about my experience.

If by using a small part of these macros, I can reduce my log time then I will (our last big away trip it took 3 full days to log), but I'll take on board that some may not see it that way.

Cheers,

[Big Matt and Shell]

This series of posts was split from another thread as this discussion was veering off to concepts not applicable to the original topic.

Thanks CAW, I did feel a bit like we were hijacking Johns thread.

[Team Rubik]

This series of posts was split from another thread as this discussion was veering off to concepts not applicable to the original topic.

Thanks CAW, I did feel a bit like we were hijacking Johns thread.

Ah yes, guilty, sorry. Ian, thank you for your response, you have given me another perspective to consider next time I'm reading through logs.

[Gowza]

I've come across (and i'm sure others have too) a GC logging macro for GSAK: http://gsak.net/board/index.php?showtopic=12105 which links from GSAK straight to the logging page of GC.com. It appeared quite handy...

Has any similar thing been developed for GCA?

[caughtatwork]

I've come across (and i'm sure others have too) a GC logging macro for GSAK: http://gsak.net/board/index.php?showtopic=12105 which links from GSAK straight to the logging page of GC.com. It appeared quite handy...

Has any similar thing been developed for GCA?

Of course, chuckles.
The wiki knows all.
http://wiki.geocaching.com.au/wiki/Logg ... _with_GSAK

[Gowza]

Never doubted you for a second!!

Ok - I have had a squiz at the text in the macro and (not being an expert!) it appears that the macro recognises the 'GA' cache source but doesn't have a URL to link to:

BEGINSUB Name=LogCache
CLIP Data=$LogMemo
BEGINCASE
CASE $d_Source="GA" # It's a Geocaching Australia cache
$URL="http://geocaching.com.au/my/log/new/" + $d_Code
CASE $d_Source="GC" # It's a Geocaching.com cache
BEGINCASE
CASE $d_CacheType="Y" OR $d_CacheType="O"
$URL=$d_Url
CASE $d_CacheType="G"
$URL="http://www.geocaching.com/mark/log.aspx?WP=%code"
OTHERWISE
$URL="http://www.geocaching.com/seek/log.aspx?ID=%gcid"
ENDCASE
OTHERWISE
MSGOK Msg="The source of this waypoint is ambiguous. Opening waypoint URL"
$URL=$d_Url
ENDCASE
IF Not($LoginFormCB)
WEB URL="$URL"
ELSE
$LogForm = Editform($LogForm,"Browser1","url",$URL)
WHILE TRUE
$FormExit = form($LogForm,"")
IF $FormExit = "SystemExit"
BREAK
ENDIF
ENDWHILE
ENDIF

I assume one would just put in a line referencing the GA code and listing an associated URL.... Am I right?

Help!!

[caughtatwork]

Code: Select all

CASE $d_Source="GA" # It's a Geocaching Australia cache
$URL="http://geocaching.com.au/my/log/new/" + $d_Code

It appears to be already there.
Looks like that macro is all ready to go from the start.

Find a GCA cache in your GSAK database, enter some characters in the log section and hit LOG.
It should take you to the GCA cache page.