Those were good examples, thanks. > Its been a while since I looked at routing.xml, but my impression is that, > depending on type of routing (auto, bicycle, foot, etc.) and type of road, > “avoid” is used in both of the above contexts leading to confusion.
I *think* osmand is quite consistent. "avoid" is used for "strictly must not use". > Example1: In general, I’d prefer to not travel on unpaved roads. But I have > some relatives who live on an unpaved road. If I cannot drive on unpaved > roads at all, I will not be able to get to their house. I would like a way > to tell the routing software that I would rather not drive on unpaved roads > but I will if I have to. Osmand does this already, under the assumption that the unpaved road is slower. "avoid unpaved" is for vehicles that strictly must not leave a paved road. Note that Osmand does not have any support for 4WD owners who might want to tell the routing algorithm that paved and unpaved are equally preferable. > Example2: I am riding a moped/motorized cycle and the law strictly prohibits > me from riding it on a freeway/motorway. If all the possible ways from point > A to point B require some freeway/motorway driving, then I cannot get to B. > I would like a way to tell the routing software that I cannot drive on a > freeway/motorway. This is "avoid motorways" > Example3: I am driving my 90 year old vintage automobile which is legal for > use on the freeway/motorway, but in general I’d rather travel on the older > side roads. I would like a way to tell the routing software that I would > rather not drive on freeways/motorways but I will if I have to. Osmand has no direct support for this. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Osmand" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
