Add GPX-Routes to journey

[solluh]

In the trip planning I can upload GPX-files. Sadly they are not visible in the journey but I'd like them to be so.

planning:

journey:

[tmp0r]

That would be a really great feature. It would be cool if, in addition to displaying it in Journey, photos with GPS coordinates in their metadata could also be shown on the track - similar to, for example, the route view in Komoot.

[mauriceboe]

The tracks are done and land in 4.0.0 (#1911). The photo half is not in it, and I want to be straight about why rather than leave it looking forgotten.

What ships

Your GPX routes now draw on the journey map. Nothing to switch on and nothing to re-upload: a journey has no trip of its own, but every entry remembers which trip it came from, and a trip's routed geometry already sits on its places. So the route you imported while planning is the one that appears in the journal.

• Drawn solid, in the colour that track already has in the planner, with a white casing so it stays readable on satellite tiles.
• That is deliberately different from the thin dashed line joining entries in date order. One is a route you recorded, the other is TREK connecting dots.
• Hovering a track shows its name.
• Works in both map engines and in the mobile map-timeline.
• A journey built from several trips shows all of their tracks together.

Tested against real files rather than only in unit tests: five GPX fixtures (a track with elevation, one without, two tracks in one file, a waypoint-only file, and a <rte> instead of a <trk>), imported into two trips of one journey. All five surface, waypoint-only files correctly produce no lines, and elevation is dropped since nothing on the map reads it.

What is not in it, and what it would take

@tmp0r, your idea is a good one, and I did look at what it needs before deciding. It is a separate piece of work, not a small addition to this one:

The coordinates are not stored. journey_photos has no lat/lng. For Immich and Synology TREK already reads EXIF and GPS, but only to sort the picker by distance from the entry; nothing is kept. For photos you upload yourself there is no EXIF parsing at all. So it means a migration plus reading EXIF on upload.

GPS is missing from photos more often than you would think. Any camera without a GPS chip, and any photo that travelled through a messenger or a share sheet, arrives stripped. A track dotted with photos would be empty or nearly empty for a lot of people, and empty without explanation reads as broken.

And the part that is not a technical question at all: journeys can be shared. Storing photo coordinates and drawing them means exact positions travel with a shared journey, including someone's home if they uploaded a photo taken while packing. That needs a deliberate decision and probably a per-journey switch, not a side effect of a feature about routes.

None of that is a no. But it is its own feature, with its own migration, its own EXIF handling and its own privacy switch, and it only makes sense once the tracks exist, which is why the tracks went first.

@tmp0r, please open it as its own feature request rather than leaving it here. This thread is about the routes and is closed out by #1911, so your idea would quietly go quiet with it. As a request of its own it stays visible, other people can upvote it on its merits, and the privacy question can be settled in the open instead of buried in a comment. Link back to this thread and I will pick it up from there.