Hacker News Reader

Comment by karussell | Hacker News Reader

Thanks :)

Do you mean preferring bigger roads for car? This is tricky as optimizing for time sometimes introduces big detours and so we consider also distance (that can take you off big roads) and so yes, we have to improve this further. At least for (small) truck we have to improve there :)

View on HN

For bicycle, in my case. Sorry, should have specified. Bicycle infrastructure is awful where I live so I need to spend a lot of cognitive effort just not being killed by the road. In that mental state I can't follow very complicated directions, so I prefer bigger roads!

Bike routes are currently heavily optimized already and sometimes I'm also a bit surprised about the good route quality ;) but actually this is only possible with the fantastic OpenStreetmap data. Still the most improvements are probably possible via data improvements in many areas. Still we will try to improve routes via "less turns" and more precise elevation data etc. For bike routing we only need to keep the balance between time, distance, simple route and beautiful route ;)

Something you could do to be better than Google Maps would be to prefer stoplights over two way stops for left turns. That nearly got me sideswiped in SF once.

Do you have an example? (avoiding left turns is the same problem like avoiding turns in general that is possible now with some new code we have since 1.0 or so, but we have to do more work to make it working in real world)

I don't have a specific route I can link to, sorry. I was navigating in an unfamiliar area of SF once and directed to turn right one street before what turned out to be a major street, then make a left turn onto another major street. The directed left turn was from a stop sign onto a street with poor visibility and cross-traffic not stopping. If I had gone one street further before the right, there would have been a stoplight.

Basically if you have data on the type of an intersection, favoring nearby controlled intersections for difficult turns would probably be helfpul, especially in hilly areas.

I just tested some bike routes for my city. I agree, well done. ;)

Being able to export to gpx is also very cool.

I feel like "best" biking routes are very subjective, so I'm sure you can't cater everyone, perfectly.

A cool feature I'd love: the ability to Google Street view right from the non-Google Maps service. Would that be allowed?

Spreaking of bike routes, personally that's why I prefer Grasshopper over other route planners - exactly because it seems to show the most direct path, often avoiding large roads. Riding a bike along a road with heavy car traffic is not enjoyable.

Sorry for hijacking GraphHopper's thread, but: you might want to try the OsmAnd phone app—it has some settings for routes in this very vein. E.g. ‘no unpaved roads’ and such. Not sure if it would solve your specific case, and OsmAnd isn't completely free, but it's an option (specifically map updates are limited for free, at least in the Play Store version).

I have the problem with OsmAnd that, where there's a freeway offramp that briefly parallels and then rejoins the freeway, OsmAnd always chooses to take the offramp and then immediately get back on the freeway. There are no words for how incredibly stupid this is.

Is there a setting that disables this ludicrous behavior? Why is that setting set to "stupid and dangerous" by default?

Adding a small intersection traversal penalty/cost to the calculation should eliminate most instances of this.

I use osmand. I'm not sure whether it uses GraphHopper or not.

But, when routing from Santa Cruz to San Francisco, every time there's a freeway offramp that parallels the freeway and then rejoins it, the osmand routing wants me to take that offramp. So that I can then, just a few seconds later, get back on to the freeway.

This isn't just annoying, it's dangerous. If that's you, can you fix it? And if not, can you make sure you don't do the same thing?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com