Hoi,
I have now split the bike and pedestrian profiles into two profiles, where
one preferes paved ways, the other unpaved ones. Note that apart from one or
two exceptions, the different profiles do not exclude more ways, they just
rank them lower to give you a better route. This should cater best to the
average biker/walker. Extreme cases like MTB or racing bikes would need
their own profiles but that is probably better done on dedicated sites.
Other changes:
* for bikes, mtb:scale is taken into account (excluding the path if set)
* optional hill shading layer
The whole issue with elevation profiles is a bit more complicated as
this really needs support from the routing engine. There are plans to
implement it but when that will happen, I do not know.
Sarah
On Sat, Oct 27, 2012 at 08:34:21PM +0200, Philipp Schultz wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I have tried to route my usual bike trips between work@Bern and
> home@Biel/Bienne
> and I am impressed by the quality of the routing. Even as indigenous biker
> I got a few useful hints for alternative routes. I think that tool is
> already a very useful planning help.
>
> To increase the comfort for bikers, the routing algorithm should take in
> account elevation, meaning if there is a route around a hill I would prefer
> a few km more than 100 m elevation. This may also be realised with a
> diferentiated speed scale like:
> +-3% 28 kmh
> +5% 20 kmh
> +8% 15 kmh
> -5% 35 kmh
> -8% 50 kmh
>
> Since bikers have quite different requirements regarding pavement - I have
> a bike (Tourenrad / vélo de randonée) that fits to any pavement but single
> trails only descending - this should be a setting like
> road (only paved)
> touring (paved unpaved including tracks and easy trails)
> mountain bike (only trails)
>
> Thanks
> Philipp
>
>
> 2012/10/27 Michel Schinz <michel.schinz@gmail.com>
>
> > On Sat, Oct 27, 2012 at 4:45 PM, datendelphin
> > <mailinglist@osm.datendelphin.net> wrote:
> >
> > > For paths, could the sac_scale tag maybe be used? if sac scale is
> > > mountain_hiking or more, don't use it for the bike profile.
> >
> > Right, and according to the document Sarah put on the wiki
> > (https://github.com/lonvia/cbf-routing-profiles/wiki/Profiles), this
> > is already done: everything that has a sac_scale tag is considered
> > unroutable. The path I mentioned in my example doesn't have that tag,
> > and I could indeed simply add it. That would solve that particular
> > problem, but I'm wondering whether this solution isn't a bit
> > fragile... Anyway, I don't have something much better to suggest for
> > now...
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Michel.
> > _______________________________________________
> > talk-ch mailing list
> > talk-ch@openstreetmap.ch
> > http://lists.openstreetmap.ch/mailman/listinfo/talk-ch
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Philipp Schultz
> Rue Ernst-Schüler 27
> CH-2502 Biel/Bienne
>
> Tel +41 32 342 31 69
> Mob +41 79 826 81 18
> _______________________________________________
> talk-ch mailing list
> talk-ch@openstreetmap.ch
> http://lists.openstreetmap.ch/mailman/listinfo/talk-ch
_______________________________________________
talk-ch mailing list
talk-ch@openstreetmap.ch
http://lists.openstreetmap.ch/mailman/listinfo/talk-ch