We need Beeline added to the Route Profiles so Beeline can be selected from the Curvature Menu. The documentation for Beeline also needs updating since there is no Beeline page in the documentation explaining where and how to use Beeline.
Also we need a new Route Profile ‘Shortest’ since fastest route does not always equate to shortest route. For example, I recently wanted to route across the English channel on a ferry and Kurviger refused to route using the ferry. Setting the Route Profile to ‘Curvy’ and ‘Expressway avoidance to active’ in some cases triggered routing to use the ferry (bug?). See this thread, Straight Line (Beeline) (BUG?) - #11 by Maxx18. Anyway setting Route Profile to shortest should trigger routing to the ferry every time that route is shorter.
You are right. There is not explained the term “beeline”. In english the term is “Straight line”, in german it is “Luftlinie”.
In the documentation you find these terms, and what they are for:
The problem with the page is the only pictures with the Beeline icon have no title so you do not know where to go in Kurviger to find the icon. I didn’t even know there was a ‘Detailed Waypoint List’ until yesterday. Also there is no explanation that the little bird icon represents Beeline. In my opinion this should be improved.
That is an excellent point and shows how I am still learning about Kurviger. And here is where the documentation failed to guide me to the correct solution.
Why can’t we have a shortest route? And why such a strong response? This is my first request. I tried searching the forum and did not find any explanation? Maybe I missed it I don’t know. So I have to ask here.
So, which one is official? In the app it is called “beeline” on the pages you linked it is called “Straight line” and three sentences later in the text also “airline”. I guess people adopt first what is written in the app and that would be “beeline”. Can someone update the page on forum?
That’s really a problem in Kurviger. Even in website, app and documentation are used different terms for the same thing. That should not be. In a little team like Kurviger it should be possible to use unified official terms.
On the other hand, for searches it would be helpful when in documentation to the official term in Kurviger often used terms are added in the text perhaps in brackets.
E.g. official term “Straight line” completed with the additional terms in brackets (“beeline”, “airline”).
To be honest, I don’t think that we should introduce a shortest route feature just because of ferries. I guess there are some arguments for shortest route, but the “correct” shortest route, is not great as it might use an awful road, if a better road might only be 0.1% longer. So I think in reality shortest route is not what most users would want usually. In special circumstances, you can always add a SP or use the beeline option to change the route.
I updated the page
Website and app should be very much the same terms? But yeah, in the documentation and especially in the forum it can simply happen that people use synonyms for a feature. We try to improve though
I was just using ferries as one example where there could be a benefit. Primary benefits for shortest route are:
Less wear and tear.
Less fuel usage.
Sometimes the shortest route can be a really special road. I found one in Croatia using shortest route with a different navigation app.
Also about awful roads, in my experience the ‘Avoid unpaved roads’ under ‘Avoidances’ will filter out the bad roads.
And in my experience I have never seen the shortest route only be “0.1%” shorter. In one case the road was over 25% longer and even as high as 50% where the shortest route was the more interesting road to ride on. This mostly happens in mountainness regions.
I do hope you will reconsider after reading these points.
Thank you for the website update!
I also want to say Kurviger has done an excellent job on the website for route creation. It is the best I have seen on the Internet. Google Maps has a slight advantage with addresses however everything else is much better that the competition.
I would place the Kurviger app in 2nd place which is a big accomplishment for such a small team!
Have you considered enlisting users to help with non critical sections of the website, app and documentation?
Yes, I totally get these points. The thing is, adding one more routing profile is a very serious change that needs to be considered very well. So far we haven’t received nearly enough demand for this. So from our side we either need high demand for a feature or we need to clearly see a big benefit by adding a feature, ideally both. For the shortest route both are not a clear yes, so I fear we won’t be able to do this anytime soon.
Yes, so our documentation is Wiki, so everyone could collaborate, we have closed it down, so not everyone can sign up, but if you would like to work on our documentation, that would be appreciated, just let me know and we can work something out.
Other than that, we appreciate your input and support here in the forum .
Sorry for the long delay in replying. While planning a tour to Scotland I have also been carefully considering your reply.
After pondering what you wrote about the routing profiles being a serious change I think I now understand. I was envisioning adding routing profiles as just adding another routing algorithm. I had not considered the possibility that all of the routing profiles are intertwined with each other (my speculation). And with a small staff and add in testing I can understand this is a serious addition. Perhaps the routing profile code could be simplified before adding a shortest route profile to make future bug fixes and changes easier to support? Of course since I have not seen the code maybe my speculation is completely incorrect.
However I still see a need for a shortest route profile. Numerous times while creating a tour route in Scotland Kurviger insisted on drawing a route around an inland ferry rather than routing across a Loch using a ferry. Or perhaps there are some tips on how to make ferry routing work more seemlessly? The only way I was able to get Kurviger to use the ferry route is to drop multiple points on the ferry route until Kurviger gives up and routes using the ferry route. In my opinion this is not user friendly.
The pros to a shortest routing algorithm is fixing routing issues. The negative would be the difficulty in making the additions to the code. I have to ask here which is better for your customers?
As to the number of users that are interested in a shortest route profile I believe this can only be known with a customer survey. I suspect most users rarely visit the forums.
Another question that could be asked while conducting a survey would be offline maps. I suspect there are users that are bypassing Kurviger because of the lack of offline maps, POI data, etc. This is a loss of revenue for Kurviger. I know in my usage case, my device does not have Internet data while away from WiFi so offline maps is essential. I want to use Kurviger for my navigation software however I cannot given the lack of offline maps. Nor can I justiy having to purchase a second data plan, one for my phone and another for my navigation device. Hence this is why I am only using the Kurviger website for creating routes. I know the the organization that makes the navigation software I am using is working on a website. So it is only a matter of time before they catch up with the Kurviger website. When that happens I will likely shift completely away from Kurviger since I would no longer be able to justify two mapping software subscriptions.
Okay I feel like I have worn out these two topics and have no more reasons to give at this time. So I will stop posting about a shortest route profile and offline maps. I do hope you will take my suggestions to ask the user base if they are interested and to reconsider the direction Kurviger is heading.
Also, I considered your offer to give me access to the wiki documentation and I do not believe I am a good fit for that role. In my previous careers I was a network engineer, some software development and primarily a project manager. Writing documentation is not one of my strengths.
Thank you for listening and I hope I have not been to much trouble.
Here is a hint: put Via-points at both piers (outgoing and incoming) on the body of water across which you want to use the ferry and convert this route segment to beeline. Then you have fixed your desired ferry route and you can ride the rest of it.
While that works sort of okay for shorter ferries it does not work so well for longer ferries since it does not take into account how long the ferry travel takes. Other routing software I have tested and used adjusted the travel time according to the ferry time. I am not sure if that was based on actual times or perhaps an average time for ferries based on the distance.
I did try your suggestion on an actual route and the time was lower with a Beeline route so some adjustments are being made.
Your suggestion is a usable workaround if you are not trying to manage time.
It would be nice if navigation software accounted for ferry schedules too however I suppose I desire to much.
One task I need to do for the Scotland trip I am working on is to now make sure all of the ferry schedules match with the arrival times. I think I am good since I was checking as I went along however it does not hurt to double check so there are no surprises.
I just thought of this too. Think of a new user testing different routing software and it fails routing the ferry some users will just move on since they have already likely seen software that just works. More loss sales! I can name four that just work.
Perhaps this might be a workaroud. @Pasquale improved the export from Kurviger to create a roadbook. Very nice work. In this roadbook you can consider more aspects of your travel, like pause or accomodation. IMHO ferries are not the only time consuming parts, affecting the planning.
Here is a planned feature which proposes to have at least the starting time as parameter, as current road construction sides etc. also affect planning. The Kurviger team is aware of more rquirementments.
Those are some interesting additions. I would suggest looking at Furkot for additional ideas for trip planning. So far they have the most comprehensive. Integration provided their are no copyright issues would be great!
Can you post one or two Kurviger-Links where it didn’t work according to your expectations? From the whole discussion we are having here I got the impression that there would be at least 5 to 10 cases that you had to readjust manually. I planned a 10 day Tour in Norway (which has similar land-water structure with Fjords) but had no problems whatsoever with ferries. Of course, Norway is not Scotland, therefore it would be nice if you could share some examples that caused you trouble.
