Am 17.07.2014 20:14, schrieb Maarten Deen: > On 2014-07-17 16:38, Richard Fairhurst wrote: >> Maarten Deen wrote:
Thanks for an online bicyle routing. >>> It's nice and fast! But it is not really apt in finding shortest or >>> quickest routes. +1 >>> I entered my daily commute (from 51.3207,5.9888 to 51.5428,5.9827, >>> permalink does not work properly) and it comes with a (for me new) >>> route of 18.3 miles (=29.45 km) in 2:02. >>> If I move the route to what I actually do, I get 17.9 miles and 1:59. >>> And there are no paths or tracks in either route. >> >> The route it chooses has an off-road cycleway for more of the route >> (all the >> way to Eijkenhofweg) and then highway=unclassified (Steegse Peelweg), >> whereas the 17.9-mile route has more highway=tertiary (Loorban and >> Veulenseweg). In general cycle.travel prefers a balanced route using >> traffic-free and quiet roads, rather than just trying to find the >> shortest >> or quickest route along busier roads. I find several problems. 1. How are separate drawn cycleways next to roads handled ? 2. Neither traffic_light/crossing nor shape turns are evaluated. 3. I would like to show you some examples but I did not find any link/shortlink feature. Are gpx tracks any help ? > So, can't I just ask shortest or quickest road? As you say, the router > has no idea about traffic levels. I mean, if a router can't give me > either shortest or quickest, then I always think I get some random route > that is not optimal in any aspect. +1 Cheers colliar
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
