-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 118
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Distinguish between villages/towns and country #692
Comments
As far as villages/cities are concerned, you can try your luck with the newly introduced However, be prepared for a lot of frustration, as the logic behind the creation of these new pseudo tags is unfortunately not very sophisticated, which results in a very high rate of false positives and false negatives.
You can assign different I don't know of any good way to distinguish between different countries. |
I see this in trekking profile, but I don't know what is estimated_town_class 1 for example. Is there any explanation? Even in profile developer guide I didn't find anything.
This seems to work better for me. But I'd prefer different rules for villages/towns and rural. |
As far as documentation goes, this is all we have at the moment: Environmental considerations
In short: All ways within the OpenStreetMap administrative boundaries of cities with a population between 50,000 and 80,000 inhabitants are assigned the tag
You can visualize the new pseudo tags to some extent with this tool: https://brouter.de/brouter-web/PseudoTags.html |
Thanks! I think |
Hello BigKanaga, I think, your question is strange for a trekking profile. I had similar thought for my racebike profile...
As I was not happy with the standard profiles, I also created my own profiles that you can use in my instance: Racebike-verylowtrafic Regards |
And yet it comes much closer to what @BigKananga seeks for:
|
Hello EssBee59, thanks for your input! Big towns like estimated_town_tags aren't relevant for me. In estimated_traffic_class I see the huge disadvantage, that it doesn't distinguish between villages/towns and rural. So if i'd focus on primary/secondary/tertiary I'd automatically focus on them between villages and that's the opposite of my goal. Maxspeed could help more. I tested both of your profiles. In most parts they seem to be better than the included profiles, but they also don't satisfy me. There is too many confusing routing with some heavy detours with lots of unneccessary turns in villages. With some adjustments I got a profile now that seem to work fine for me. One important thing was turncost, another important one were some values that I changed. Until now it's ok, but it's only a workaround. The use of something like landclasses would be more reliable. I'll do some fine tuning and I think I'm on a good way. Some small offtopic: I've got 2 Android devices. One with Android 9 (LineageOS) and one with Android 13 (security patch from 1. April. 2024. On the first one everything works fine. On the second one I can't access the BRouter folder on the SD card with my file manager (sadly one security "feature" of Android). So I copied my profile on my Windows PC but it won't be recognized by BRouter. As mentioned, on my Android 9 device it works fine. Is there any chance to get my custom profile working? |
Hello, An other solution to bypass the new security in Android: |
You could try this to get a bool value that tells you whether or not a road likely fits your demands:
And then adjust the cost factor in the brouter/misc/profiles2/trekking.brf Lines 319 to 322 in ae951d9
->
But this will obviously only work realiably if all segments of major roads in the respective village or town carry a maxspeed tag, which is rarely the case even in Germany. But it might still improve the route results on average.
Yes, and I really hope that one day we (the developers) will agree that it would make a lot of sense to change the tag generation logic to properly address problems like the ones you have. |
@EssBee59 @quaelnix I'm tweaking now the the config with playing around with the values and trying a bunch of routes (from-to) where I can judge which routes would be fine for me. In the past (with default profiles) many times I had to add several intermediate goals, but now it seems that I don't need them anymore. Alt least regularly. BTW: One very important tweak was to set "ignore_cycleroutes" to "true", because with "false" routing tends to ridiculous detours with many turns just to be on a cycleroute even if it's only for 100m. If you ask me, it should be set to "true" by default and "trekking-ignore-cr" should be replaced by something like "trekking-prefer-cr" where it is set to "false" by default (-> just rename both profiles). If someone wants to follow cycleroutes, they can be shown as an overlay in Osmand and therefore I doubt that navigation is always needed. And most users will use default profile. All in all BRouter is a fantastic tool and probably the best navigation for bicycles, especially offline. Thanks to all developers! |
Now I got it. I used my "old" micro SD from my old Android 8 device in my new Android 13 device. On the new device Brouter is using the media folder while the old one used the data folder. I realized it when I checked the dates from my downloaded segment. This happens when you try to use your old data on a new device. :) |
Is it possible to distinguish between villages/towns and country? It would be very useful for my personal bicycle profile, because inside villages and small towns I prefer primary/secondary/teritary roads instead of many unnecessary turns on residential roads and smaller ways. Outside towns I prefer tracks and paths/cycleways of course. I use trekking profile as base.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: