Several times I encountered that kurviger guides me to take an exit from a major road and just guides me back on the next entrance of this major road.
As long as I am familiar with the area, I can handle this and ignore this small detour. But if I am somewhere else it can become confusing. Also if you are driving in a larger group your co-drivers might think what’s wrong with this guy.
In this example I can choose fast&curvy then kurviger doesn’t take this detour. But if I choose curvy it does. But I wouldn’t expect kurviger to take this detour, at least not in curvy but also not with extra curvy mode. In fact it is not curvy at all!
Is this something that kurviger can improve in the future or do you interprete this as expected behaviour?
Here the example. Just shortly before the end point you can see the mentioned detour:
Thanks for the report. After some digging I understand the issue, I will have a look if we can improve this case.
BTW: This should not happen that often? If you know of other examples (on a different road), please let us know .
You are right it’s only occasionally, not often
I think I can remember of two other places where something similar occurred. I will check and let you know.
I keep in mind to report such incidents in the future.
Well, not a different road, but a different place on the same road.
here another example, whereas this is a bit different to the previous one. probably not so simple to argue, but personally I don’t understand.why I am taken off the B-17 (shortly after waypoint 2 and 3) and asked to enter B-17 again one entrance later. The curviness of this alternate route is not so great compared to staying on the B-17.
Though there might be arguments why kurviger offers this route, it is not so easy to identify such situation when you plan a larger tour as the alternate route is basically in parallel to the street I planned to take.
But as I requested to stay on the B-17 by setting two waypoints on it, kurviger might consider this explicit user request when calculating the route and let the user stay on the B-17 rather offering the alternate. Probably this is not so easy to implement and other questions may come up immediately to your mind, which I don’t see as a user
This again leads me also to the often discussed missing feature to be able to set different kurviger profiles between waypoints. Being able to do this I could simply set fast&curvy until a certain waypoint is reached and then switch to extra curvy when I want kurviger to find me the curviest roads. Are you still thinking about such feature? I had a look to calimoto as they offer this. I think the approach is simple and intuitive for the user, maybe not so easy to implement
Yes it is . The curvy routing modes avoid highways/motorways, that’s why you are taken off the motorway (B 17). If you want to use motorways, it’s better to use the fastest or curvy and fast mode. So this example IMHO is the expected behavior of Kurviger.
Your first example was kind of different. Kurviger left a minor motorway (still a motorway though), but only to the on and off ramp, this is not nice.
Thanks, yes exactly this is another example. It is a bit of an edge case. It a rare combination of tags and alignment of roads that don’t happen very often. I did a brief check with overpass and would guess that there are less than 50 affected intersections in Germany where this could happen. BTW: 50 is a wild guess, but it’s not very common, I couldn’t find an example in Baden-Württemberg. There might be other examples where Kurviger leaves a road for other unrelated reasons.
Yes, indeed This feature is still on the todo list.
Desperately waiting for this
An idea on when this will become available?
Not this week
Sorry but I cannot give you a timeline yet.
There is not any ETA for new features.
Keep working and everything should be announced when is ready for testing from all of you!
I hope for beginning of next years season. To be orecise: on the northern hemisphere
Last week I was on a tour in Italy. In generally I really liked kurviger, it lead us to lots of nice roads which we would not have encountered otherwise and voice-only navigation worked quite well, so keep up the great work!
However, I also encountered these unexpected and short detours quite a few times, sometimes it lead us to some strange gravel roads that did not even exist even though the main road was curvy already.
Please find a few examples below.
Short non-existent/gravel roads:
https://kurv.gr/WdnCZ at coordinates 45.64413,10.96578 happens both with ‘fast & curvy’ and ‘curvy’ modes. There are more of these examples close by.
Going off a road to just enter it again:
https://kurv.gr/EYlru at coordinates 44.05629312432438,10.448765158653261 and 44.05078767665226,10.45329809188843
We encountered more very short detours but these are the ones I just remembered. I hope it helps, otherwise I can try to remember more of those.
Thanks, for letting us know.
The relevant part would be this shortcut, right? This looks like an issue in the data, I checked on Google Streetview where the road suddenly turns into a gravel track. Do you remember this location, if yes, maybe you could have a look at the data and improve it? I am happy to support you with this.
Again this situation looks more like a data issue to me. The main road seems to be limited to 50. The exiting road (ramp) is tagged as a rural road with no speed limit. Therefore, it looks like the better choice.
You are right, the speed limit is often missing in OSM.
All these examples have in common that the route changes between the road classification in a very short distance.
e.g. primary -> tertiary -> primary
So at least in theory it should be possible for an algorithm, to make such situations less likely.
Maybe by giving the level change (change of the road classification) an extra penalty
But presumably I am carrying sand to the beach here.
Yes these things are possible . We are considering something like this in the future. But these things come at a cost, performance wise, and also potentially decreasing the quality of routes. So it’s not straightforward .
That is exactly the right thing, that is kind of also what I wanted to articulate when I was arguing about the “fastest” setting with Robin months ago but you destilled into a few words. +1 this is what we need
I am happy to let you know that we were able to improve a couple of these undesirable major road exits. If you find related cases to the discussed cases here, that seem to became worse, don’t hesitate to let us know.
Not became worse, but still existent: https://kurv.gr/pxPp4
Yes definitely . But it should be improved without making other routes worse
To celebrate this joyeous occasion, I went back and dug through the forum to find one of the first complaints I ever made, the routing in the (then so-called) “fast” setting, which was… bad in those days
Well, at least bad judging by today’s standards! I couldn’t find the post for the life of me, but I know that my route was from Newcastle to Glasgow, and now look at this beauty:
That is a big thumbs up for the accumulated improvements to the “fastest” setting in the last months