This object is in archive! 
Prefer forward driving by active route re-calculation.
Completed
Add neglected return order to a 'penalty counter" into the reverse (shorter) drive direction.
Ignoring (multiple) return suggestions so promotes the (alternative) forward (longer) path.
My (cycling) settings: Alert distance: 75m. Recalculation distance: 100m.
Good day Willy,
we probably talk mainly about BRouter right? In case, there is any recalculation, Locus has the only option: specify to BRouter current users direction and also how long (in seconds), the user should stay in the current direction.
Current Locus Map has defined 3 seconds. From your personal experience, this time is too short?
In case of GraphHopper, there is only an option of "users direction", not the time.
Good day Willy,
we probably talk mainly about BRouter right? In case, there is any recalculation, Locus has the only option: specify to BRouter current users direction and also how long (in seconds), the user should stay in the current direction.
Current Locus Map has defined 3 seconds. From your personal experience, this time is too short?
In case of GraphHopper, there is only an option of "users direction", not the time.
Hi guys,
I'm analyzing this problem and its solutions.
Seems that system I have in the code for BRouter is just copy&paste mistake from old not anymore working MapQuest system. Seems that BRouter does not support necessary feature at all, but I've rather asked on BRouter forum here, so we will see.
Anyway, GraphHopper implementation should be correct. GraphHopper is mainly online-based routing, but from my tests, data usage is so low (few kb) that it does not even worth to worry. So if possible, give it a try Willy, it should be better.
And if I get some information from Arndt about any possibility to do this in BRouter as well, I'll definitely implement it and let you know here.
Hi guys,
I'm analyzing this problem and its solutions.
Seems that system I have in the code for BRouter is just copy&paste mistake from old not anymore working MapQuest system. Seems that BRouter does not support necessary feature at all, but I've rather asked on BRouter forum here, so we will see.
Anyway, GraphHopper implementation should be correct. GraphHopper is mainly online-based routing, but from my tests, data usage is so low (few kb) that it does not even worth to worry. So if possible, give it a try Willy, it should be better.
And if I get some information from Arndt about any possibility to do this in BRouter as well, I'll definitely implement it and let you know here.
I watched the presentation given in the link above.
It's no technical instruction but there is a explanation how Brouter does recalculation internally.
If you lost the planned route brouter checks for the nearest point of the planned track doesnt matter if back or forward direction.
It doesn't use this as the target for recalculation because it might you point back. Instead it looks for a point factor 30 of this distance in forward direction and uses this as the recalculation target point. With this the new recalculated way is more or less "optimal".
Assume you start recalculation when nearest point is 200m.
Brouter looks for a point in (200*30) 6km distance (forward) as the target point.
Interesting idea.
I think this isn't used in Locus for route priority?
As far as I undersood Osmand uses this recalculation algorithm.
Then there should be a interface for this.
I watched the presentation given in the link above.
It's no technical instruction but there is a explanation how Brouter does recalculation internally.
If you lost the planned route brouter checks for the nearest point of the planned track doesnt matter if back or forward direction.
It doesn't use this as the target for recalculation because it might you point back. Instead it looks for a point factor 30 of this distance in forward direction and uses this as the recalculation target point. With this the new recalculated way is more or less "optimal".
Assume you start recalculation when nearest point is 200m.
Brouter looks for a point in (200*30) 6km distance (forward) as the target point.
Interesting idea.
I think this isn't used in Locus for route priority?
As far as I undersood Osmand uses this recalculation algorithm.
Then there should be a interface for this.
Don't know what happens in this logic when planned track has multiple points in 30*x distance....
Don't know what happens in this logic when planned track has multiple points in 30*x distance....
The system by (temp) return block seems to do the job correctly (V.3.38.7.5)
Maybe needs only some smaller fine tunings. Discussion topic here :
https://forum.locusmap.eu/index.php?topic=6554.msg56255#msg56255
Until recently Point Priority by multiple Via Points (transferable by gpx) was the only usefull mode
But now Route Priority (for the first time) delivers (auto)recalcualtion as expected.
Nice ! Completed !
The system by (temp) return block seems to do the job correctly (V.3.38.7.5)
Maybe needs only some smaller fine tunings. Discussion topic here :
https://forum.locusmap.eu/index.php?topic=6554.msg56255#msg56255
Until recently Point Priority by multiple Via Points (transferable by gpx) was the only usefull mode
But now Route Priority (for the first time) delivers (auto)recalcualtion as expected.
Nice ! Completed !
Replies have been locked on this page!