Display the off road sections on route and diagram #664
Replies: 6 comments 34 replies
-
|
@WolfgangZ42 Thanks for the suggestion, this is an interesting idea. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
Replying to a comment by @0709wiwiwi in #250 (comment): Description may be useful in the future for waypoint descriptions in #401. This should work as the other route details, like max speed and street name. <max_speed>30</max_speed>
<route_information>unpaved</route_information>
...
<max_speed>--</max_speed>
<route_information>--</route_information> |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
To be compatible with other routers, we only need to declare the "unpaved" sections. As the surface tag is not always filled, perhaps it is better to process the highway tag? OpenRouteService documentation has a nice classification for these tags: |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
So we just store the final result, which route sections are "unpaved". Remember routers with avoid options have a generic "Avoid unpaved". |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
Just one single note. Know I've seen more users that requested and prefer to cycle (or not) onto gravel roads. They're usually the types of users who do prefer cycling through forests roads (if still existant) instead of the crazy hustle and bustle of the regular roads. So, everyone has just simply their own preference. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
Gravel is considered in the "unpaved" category. Above is a current proposal for what can be considered as "unpaved": everything that is not in "paved" category. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
It would be highly unusual for all (6) routers to indicate this uniformly. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
@0709wiwiwi That's right, each router supports it (or not) differently. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
We can color the off road sections on the route and diagram. Also display the percentage of the off road sections.
|
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
@WolfgangZ42 Currently, we consider the surface to be unpaved if it is not (asphalt, concrete, paved). We can always improve the detection using more surface tags. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
@WolfgangZ42 We better use more paved tags as described in documentation: |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
@WolfgangZ42 Also it's useful to examine how the BRouter profiles define the |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
Sure we should take the same consideration as BRouter - ispaved seems to be perfect: Openrouteservice even includes more detailed surfaces into "paving stones": 
Thanks again for implementing the different colors on route and diagram! |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
@WolfgangZ42 We can include all values mentioned by OpenRouteService in the categories: |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
It's me again ... 🥴 When I recently showed some friends how to display off-road routes in Cruiser, we unfortunately encountered a problem. We are planning to drive the ACT Montenegro+Albania and noticed that the percentage of gravel parts is estimated much lower by Cruiser than specified by ACT. A few random checks revealed that long stretches in Albania were defined as highway=unclassified without specifying surface=*, which Cruiser interprets as paved. The latter may be correct for some countries, but probably not for most - see wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki](https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Dunclassified) In the future, could Cruiser please interpret highway=unclassified without surface=* as unpaved? I would really appreciate that. Thanks for your consideration. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
That seems to be the case to me too - unfortunately without housekeeping!
I must admit that I only thought about the route display, but of course this may look completely different for other users.
Perhaps a solution. Although "paved," "unpaved," and "unknown" complicate the situation considerably. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
As I said before, that's the best way. I did it already for the first day of the ACT MTN-AL - really time-consuming ... and just related to satellite maps. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
Btw: in BRouter the different state of the Route mentioned above is shown: |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
This is map rendering via the render theme and it displays the unpaved "surface=ground" differently So the missing surface is displayed with normal white fill color, it does not have a special rendering. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
@WolfgangZ42 The same rendering also exists in OpenStreetMap website. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
-
During the ACT Portugal tour, the question was asked several times: “How much longer will we be in the dirt - when will the asphalt return?” Unfortunately, it is not possible to answer this question, neither in navigation mode nor in planning mode.
Now that we are able to display individual route segments in different colors in planning mode:
. . . 
Would it be possible during navigation (and only there) to make the color of the route dependent on the condition defined in OSM? For example like this:
In my opinion, it is sufficient to distinguish only between asphalt and gravel.
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
All reactions