Merge Tracks assistance

[wayne]

Just so I redeem myself slightly on what's probably an obvious solution:
- I did read the manual.  http://www.topofusion.com/manual.php#toolbar
- I did search the forum and was unable to find help.

When I merge two tracks (both blue), I wind up with a black track, yellow highlight.  If I understand correctly from the help, it merges the tracks thus the two original tracks are gone, and there is a new, single merged track.

My problem is....I can't get it back to the simple track line with the trackpoints.  I have to quit the program and restart.

How do you cancel the "merged tracks" view without killing the program?

[ScottMorris]

Hey Wayne,

If you right click when in the merge tool mode, you'll get a menu that has an option to "clear all segments."  That'll get rid of any highlighting.

BTW, the tool does not remove the original tracks.  The "merged track" is only temporarily there, and you have to right click and do "save as..." to make it permanent.  (Saving it out also removes the highlight).

BTW, it only merges tracks end to end, no averaging like the network code.  Also note that you can merge whole files together by selecting them (in the file list, not map), right clicking and choosing "merge files."

Hope that helps.

[wayne]

BTW, the tool does not remove the original tracks.  The "merged track" is only temporarily there, and you have to right click and do "save as..." to make it permanent.  (Saving it out also removes the highlight).

I saw that "save as" in the help and apparently didn't understand it.  You're saying if I merge two tracks in a file, then I save that file, it does not include the merged track?

The "clear all segments" was a great clarification, thanks.  I was thinking that "clear all segments" cleared them out (i.e. removed them).  Since they were on top of each other, I wasn't certain 'cause I couldn't see underneath.

Additional suggestions would be to:
- Rename "clear all tracks" to "remove highlighting" or something without the word "clear" which implies "remove" to me.

- Update the help page to include the information here ... although if I'm the first to ask this, most people seem to understand it.

[ScottMorris]

When you are clicking on tracks in succession to merge them it doesn't matter if they came from one file or multiple files.  It just forms a temporary file that you can then later save out.

Nothing in the original file(s) gets changed.

Does that help?

The merge tool is more of a "create new route from an existing set of tracks" then a "merge tracks within a file."

Re: suggestions.

- I agree that clear implies remove, but I'm not sure 'remove highlighting' is clear enough either.  "Start over" ?  Not sure what's better.

- Agreed on help update.

Thanks.

[wayne]

I had been operating under the assumption that any time I worked on a set of tracks, they were shown by a file in the bottom pane.

For example, when I create a trail network, an automatic new file is created with tracks and waypoints.  I was assuming that joined tracks, but joined.  Instead, the new "file" is invisible, until right-click>>save.

Another suggestion to make the program more consistent would be when you join tracks, automatically create a "joined tracks layer."

Sorry, I'm looking at this with outside eyes and putting suggestions in the help forum to try to make it easier, rather than in the suggestion forum.

[ScottMorris]

A join tracks layer might make sense, yes.  I'll think about what other situations this might apply to.

But yep, the merged track you are working is invisible until saved.

[wayne]

It was not my intent to seem critical above; I hope you're not taking it that way.

I was confused because I expected a certain behavior, and didn't understand what I was seeing.  I understand the way that part of the program works now. 

I know I pop up out of the blue for a few months, bug the tar out of you with questions and suggestions, then disappear again.  Pretty much follows my life and when I have time enough to do outdoors things and experiment with your program.

My personal experience is that it's not the most intuitive program, but it is a very powerful one for the parts I figured out.  TopoFusion is a regular part of my mapping arsenal and I keep plucking away at the different things it can do.  You ever hold a class or Q&A session in Tucson (when I'm in town) and I'll be there.

Thanks again for the help and the patience.

[ScottMorris]

Yep, didn't take it as critical.  Your experience is always well appreciated.  I can't take all input into account of course, but I really do like to understand when people expect the software to work a different way than it does.

Gets me to think if nothing else.

[kevroc]

Talk about jumping into this thread a little late...

I'm just getting the hang of the app and loving it so far.  There is definitely some language to pick up on but that's just the learning process.

I'm jumping in here because I was looking for a way to take several tracks of the same trail and "MERGE (haha)" them together to average them out and form one good track.  After working with the Merge tool I understand now that it's really a way of Joining Tracks.  Which would be the opposite I suppose of Splitting a track.

I really like the Network Trails feature.  Finding it a little difficult in the sense that my tracks are not all that clean, those spots where I've double-backed on a trail or walking around to find a spot to filter water, the Network Trails feature is almost a little too precise in the sense that it makes alternate trails and intersections out of all that stuff.

No real question here, just my input that if you did have a way to merge (oops. "average") two or more identical trails to create one good one that would be great

Thanks,

Kevin

[ScottMorris]

Thanks, yeah, trail averaging is something we want to take a closer look at, and a simple MERGE function would be a good idea.  Maybe call it the average function.  It could make a bunch of assumptions that are not valid for the network code.

[kevroc]

Average is a good term.  I see it supporting the network feature becuase you'd want to average your same tracks down to one good track for each trail before then using the network feature.  The problem I have now with the network feature is that I don't have a good starting track to use as a base, but if I could average my tracks down to all good tracks then make a network out of them I would end up with a much more accurate network map.