It’s about waypoint types (shaping dots) – not waypoint names.
You will be able to also switch waypoint types [stopover vs shaping] in next (beta) release.
Waypoint type changes can be done via their long press menu and in waypoints list (like their names).
Looks great. I’m really looking forwards to test the new features (didn’t appear in my app updates yet) .
One question prior to my first tests: will the options of the rerouting mode distinguish between regular waypoints and shaping points?
I mean: will the option “next unvisited waypoint” automatically omit shaping points and focus only on the next regular waypoint in the route?
If so: will there be an additional rerouting option considering both types (something like “next unvisited way- or shaping-point”)?
And of course: by introducing shaping points you created a new challenge for the Kurviger website to support a corresponding feature (with an appropriate integration into the app) .
Rerouting currently uses all waypoint types: stopover + shaping.
If skip the shaping points, then reroutes are different from planned old routes.
Does that make sense or navigators usually skip shaping points in rerouting?
Yes, in my opinion this makes sense (at least as a configurable option). Because even if you’re forced to take a detour you still want to reach/visit regular waypoints (as they’re somehow mandatory parts of your route). But this is not always the case with shaping points which were used to affect the “layout” of your route because the detour anyhow changed the circumstances.
I think the different handling of waypoints and shaping point in case of rerouting would be one of the most essential benefits of those both types.
Perhaps, though in a round trip with start / end and 1-2 shaping points,
if not use shaping points, then rerouting leads straight back to the start.
So seems like having an extra setting: use shaping points in rerouting?
my Navigator 5 has a good strategy (from my point of view): If you cross the route between two points and there are no ViaPoints “undone” before the crossing point, all ShapingPoints before are skipped.
“Crossing” also includes turning onto the calculated route after riding a detour “manually”.
To skip ViaPoints you have to press a skip button.
Automatic skip of waypoints (of any type) and resume of route continue to work like before.
The basic feature with waypoint types, like mentioned above and in other navigators is:
“Shaping points are any position along a route that will not alert you when you arrive.”
(but they continue to shape the route path)
I do not fully agree: In Garmin Navigators (Zumo and also BMW Navigators) one big difference between ShapingPoints and ViaPoints is, that ShapingPoints do not have to be “reached”, they are skipped automatically if you drive a detour etc.
ViaPoints have to be reached - so if you do not Skip them manually, Garmin Navigators might guide you backwards on the planned route to the “not reached” ViaPoint.
From my point of view this is the most important difference between those 2 kind of points…
You can already use the “Next unvisited waypoint” option for that kind of rerouting.
This is more if a navigator is flexible allowing automatic skip of waypoints or not (a different option).
We cannot fill the UI or the implementation with so many workflows, must use some sane defaults.
The above discussion started more about what happens with next waypoint types during rerouting.
I 100% agree with this.
- stopover points (or viaPoints) -> must not be skipped automaticaly
- shaping points -> can be skipped automatically
My ideal rerouting strategy would be a combination between “next unvisited waypoint” and “nearest waypoint” something like this:
Use nearest waypoint
unless a “stopover waypoint” would be skipped
Then use “next unvisited stopover point”
That’s exactly what I meant by asking how shaping points will be handled in case of rerouting.
In my opinion a differentiation would be a helpful (and consequent) addition to the way those both types are displayed.
Therefore there would be 2 types of waypoints:
- shaping-points: can be omitted in case of rerouting
- visit-points (or via-points): cannot be ommitted automatically (only the user deletes them, changes them into a shaping-point or uses the “skip next waypoint” function)
I think there wouldn’t be any new/addtional UI elements necessary to support such a behaviour because its just the internal logic of the rerouting algorithm.
So that just means that shaping points, as they don’t participate in turn instructions / voice guidance,
they shouldn’t participate at all also in rerouting. Rerouting uses only via points (like in 1.12 version).
Yes, that’s the reaon why I would vote for an additional options in the rerouting settings:
- nearest point in route
- nearest waypoint (means: both types)
- next unvisited waypoint (means: both types)
- next unvisited visit-point (means: without considering shaping-points)
To be more specific: if the last (new) option is set, rerouting should of course only omit all shaping-points before the next unvisited visit-point - not those behind it. Because a detour/rerouting should only affect the part of my route which leads to my next unvisited visit-point, not the whole route. This way the impact will remain as minimal as possible. But also as reasoned as necessary.
Why a new option? Because this most probably still depends on the way someone uses the two types of waypoints. I’m pretty sure that there will be differences between - for example - (former?) Garmin users and those who are using Kurviger as straight forward and simple as possible (and therefore won’t even use shaping-points at all).
(moved discussion in its related feature topic)
I really like and appreciate the way you take care about keeping topics and discussions structured and well organized .
That seems complicated and there are still the “Avoid roadblock” and “Skip next waypoint” reroutings, we cannot have multiple options in every UI rerouting process.
Also how about round trips, are their auto generated intermediate points supposed to be shaping points (now they are) or yellow via points? If they are shaping points then a rerouting that skips them will lead back to start.
So probably the most simple workflow is to keep the UI options unmodified.
And use shaping points only for rerouting from nearest / next waypoint to the end, so can maintain the rest route geometry.