Reading out the name of the waypoint and associated notes

[M. Schrijver]

@mzokk
What @lenny-o says make totale sense. Viapoints forces you to do something. And that is the last thing you want when riding a route. A navigation needs to guide you not forcing. Me as a person forces to navigation to do something. I always say: "A navigation needs to guide and follow you at the same time".
That's why i never use viapoints, only shapingpoints. But i also use colors and notes on my shaping points. To point out things along the road. But if i mis them, also fine. No worries.
Just like @lenny-o i also like to have a separation between the standard shaping points and the shaping points with additional notes and/or color. There is absolute no need to have an announcement for every waypoint. Just the shapping points which matters are enough.

[Con Hennekens]

A VIA point should be just there as an obligatory routepoint (thus to prevent it from auto skipping), and for no other reasons.

[Lenny O]

I think it should be quite easy to implement the distinction between the points having Notes and the ones that do not for read-outs. (I am a retired IT programmer).
Another super annoying thing when it reads out ALL shaping points is that it first reads out the location of the waypoint, and I mean FULL ADDRESS, including the Country and the postal code..... before it actually reads the Notes.
To prevent that you'd have to rename or blank out the address of EVERY shaping point, which is crazy
So, in combination the great, needed and very usefull feature is not used by many because of not being "user-friendly" (as we call it in the IT world).

[Con Hennekens]

@Lenny-O, It's not an address field, it's a name field. The name field is not being spoken when [it contains numeric characters] AND [the note field is empty]. So when a note is added, the name AND note is being spoken, with or without any numeric characters. So, what I always do, is give the waypoint a sensible name. Often that is enough, and if you want to add more then use the note field.

[Herman Veldhuizen]

@lenny-o there are more wishes. i myself dont want to see some (shaping) points while navigating, nor am I interested in the ETA info.

[Herman Veldhuizen]

@con-hennekens the app doesnt have to behave the same as other apps. i agree with @m.-schrijver here that auto skipping via points is a useful feature.
just like the waypoint notification, there could be a setting for the auto skipping: None, Shape or All. Maybe best to introduce when also "route aware" navigation is supported by Here such that we are not sent back anymore. For me that would be the biggest improvement in the app for years.

[Lenny O]

@Herman-Veldhuizen I think you can avoid seeing them if you turn off "Use all waypoints" not sure of wording , do not have the phone with me at the mpoment). It is the last option in Navigate / Functional screen.
Someone please correct me if I am wrong.

[Herman Veldhuizen]

@Lenny-O Because of the fact that via points cannot be skipped, i use shaping points for all points. Therefore the setting for all points needs to be on.

[Mzokk]

Well, I like the fact that my Via points can only be skipped manually when I decide to skip them. I was just looking at a route I recently used which was 250miles ~ 400km it had 5 via points that I did not want to miss, and 34 shaping points. If there was a switch to automatically skip via points I'd want it to default to OFF so that I didn't, miss the Via points I actually wanted to see.

I think we all have our prefered ways of doing things. I would like the app to be capable of displaying custom POI's without running a route, and that certain POI's would have a proximity warning because I use POI loader with my garmin devices and like the flexibility of going for a ride and just routing to some of the POI's that pop up as nearby (For example I have a database of neolithic Dolmen.) I think that in the planner, track handling and POI handling/information could be improved and I could finally abandon Basecamp. But perhaps these requirements are niche to me and most folk would not want such features??

[M. Schrijver]

For me it is fine that Via points cannot be skipped automatic. I don't like that feature but i'm not obligated to use Viapoint when planning.
@con-hennekens You say, when the name field of a waypoint meet some terms, it is not being announced. I can tell you there is something wrong with those terms or how those terms are implemented.
When i make a route. All my default (blue) waypoints have their default name given by the MRA Planner. 98% of them are being announced in de navigation. It can be an address but also just a waypoint number.