incorrect foot profiles setup in web planner

Peter Kundrat shared this problem 46 days ago
Known

There seems to be some incorrect setup in hiking/walking profile in web planner.

Following route avoids shortest connection - road and takes you via the fields with elevation and is twice as long. Hiking profile in Brouter-web calculates the same route well.


https://web.locusmap.app/en/?planner=K4DwpgxgPggsDWATABgcwAIBsCWAJAVgF4BCA3QDID2A6gIabzYB2qA3KUA

May i also ask how often is the map updated (i.e. how long it will take until my fix in OSM will be reflected in the web planner)?

Comments (2)

photo
1

Hello Peter,

Thanks for reporting this. I will review this behavior.

Regarding updates: online maps that web planner uses are updated every 7 - 14 days. POIs twice a week, data for routing are re-generated (also distribuded for offline routing) twice a week.

photo
1

I made a fix to OSM which was reflected in the web planner after 5 or 6 days.

(EDIT: I didn't see this was answered already, due to a forum/Firefox refresh problem. My change - to a disconnected road in Canada - must've happened just after an update cycle. IMHO, these intervals are quite reasonable.)

photo
1

May i ask what did you change? I used the same setup for Brouter and it was reouted correctly.

photo
1

It looks you were fixing some unrelated OSM data issue. The issue i reported was present in Slovakia. And i am positive it is not about disconnected road(s) - as Brouter with the same setup routes correctly. Also - Locus Web Planner chooses the correct route when selecting a MTB profile using the same points.

Maybe best idea would be to make the profile visible/editable like in Brouter - so anyone could help with investigation/fix (but i understand there are too many more important features that would benefit people with subscription)

photo
1

Hi Peter, the issue you originally reported is most likely caused by one of the coefficients setting the "weights" of road (path) segments. Or combined effect of more than one, maybe. This is done in the profiles and in this case it may be just slightly too high setting of variable I highlighted in the attached picture. There is quite a few cases similar to this reported. However I don't want to make not so well thought ad-hoc changes from now on. I am making a comparative tool that visualizes the impact of changes (as difference in produced routes over set of many diverse, carefully selected samples). Once this visualizing, comparing tool is done (soon, I hope), I will be sorting out these issues, starting with cycling profiles first.

Also, all profiles that the online and offline routing uses are public, can be seen or downloaded here:

https://github.com/asamm/brouter/tree/asamm/locus-routing-profiles

photo