App does recalculate despite recalculation setting being off
-
I have a case where the App recalculates unexpectedly. See pictures attached. In my functional settings the auto recalculate is off and navigate as track is on.
Picture 1 shows the planned route with a viapoint 4 and a shaping point 5 to take me back on the planned route.
Picture 2 shows what the app has come up with after I decided to stay on the main road and ignore the viapoint 4. The app has somehow created the lower blue route which is unexpected because I am on the upper blue route as planned.
Picture 3 shows what happens when I stop and restart the navigation after having passed point 5 (and ignored 4).
-
@Herman-Veldhuizen Okey, this is a hard one.
If I understand correctly, you were ignoring waypoint 4. This being a viapoint. However, you were still "on the route" so yes, then you will indeed be sent back to waypoint 4 as this may not be missed (it's a via).
The lower blue route in picture 2 is the route to ensure you pass waypoint 4
Cause that's the fastest way to waypoint 4. You cannot do a u-turn on your current road.Picture 3, that then makes sense using the above reasoning.
This entire issue can be resolved by me allowing viapoints to be missed (when recalculations disabled). Yet, that would give other results in different scenario's and to be fair that makes less sense as viapoints by design are not allowed to be missed
-
@Corjan-Meijerink Yes I was ignoring the viapoint (4). I was thinking that with the auto recalc off (and skip waypoints automatic) the app would not try to force me to go to that via point. But I understand what you are saying now. For me however it does look strange that a restart of the navigation gives a different result. After the restart it knows it is on the track to the next point (direction taking into account) and ignores the via point 4 and this is what I expected to be the case after having passed the junction to that via point.
Changing the via point into a shaping point I think has negative side effects for me (app not showing proper ETA's to next possible stops). -
@Corjan-Meijerink I think that in the end the question we need to answer is how smart or dynamic should the 'navigate as track' really be? I have no good answer but 'feel' that it should not be smart and only recalculate on user request or confirmation. But people have different opinions.
Another fundamental question is how via points and shaping points should behave. Personally I think that shaping points should be very simple and only play a role in shaping the route which means that when navigating as a track they have no relevance anymore. This puts more responsibility/requirements to the via points which means adding extra attributes to them. I understand that this is a big change.
One unrelated thing that came to my mind is that it maybe could be useful to have audio points. They play no role in navigating but the app would speak the text in the audiopoint when the driver gets close 'enough'. -
@Corjan-Meijerink said in App does recalculate despite recalculation setting being off:
as viapoints by design are not allowed to be missed
That is surprising!
When navigating a route as track, I expected via points to be announced only but would not play a role in re-routing. It should work like navigating "real" tracks, where all points are skipped automatically as well.And if automatic re-routing is turned off, none should occur - same for "real" tracks and routes as tracks.
To my understanding, the fundamental difference between "real" tracks and route as tracks is the way they are created; during navigation, they should behave identically. Just like tracks.
-
@martinphogel-de Although I see your point (coming from a pure track solution myself), I think the current situation is quite reasonable. The main benefit of having via-points to me is that you can't miss them, so it does make sense to me that the app will keeping guiding you there, even when navigating using a track.
-
@Herko-ter-Horst said in App does recalculate despite recalculation setting being off:
The main benefit of having via-points to me is that you can't miss them, so it does make sense to me that the app will keeping guiding you there, even when navigating using a track.
OK, point taken! I do understand the benefit of this feature, even if I would not make use of it.
However, the question raised by @Herman-Veldhuizen is still valid: Should a "re-routing" to the missed waypoint occur even if "automatic re-calculation" is disabled?
-
@martinphogel-de Exactly. Not only did i have the recalculation OFF but I also had skip waypoints automatically ON.
When I ignore a navigation command (in my case to leave the main road for going to viapoint 4) then I have already decided to skip it and no interaction should be needed with these settings. An audio message could be helpfull ("Skipped waypoint 4"), such that if I skipped the viapoint by mistake I can make the app take me there somehow. So basically what I am suggesting is that via points should not be hard points when navigating as a track and with the settings mentioned above. -
@Herman-Veldhuizen
"skip waypoints automatically" only applies to shaping points, which fits into the scheme here.
As mentioned above, I do understand the idea of not skipping via points automatically. However, I'm with you and would also favour a divergence from the behaviour when navigating tracks instead of routes. To my feeling, via points have a lower significance when navigating tracks: they should only be announced as the next intermediate target with its ETA.But that's high-level moaning. I am happy to have a solution for route-as-track navigation at all!
-
@Herman-Veldhuizen said in App does recalculate despite recalculation setting being off:
Personally I think that shaping points should be very simple and only play a role in shaping the route
+1
