<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">Thanks! I've added your example to the
issue.<br>
<br>
If you or others have other tracks where I can check the bike
routing then feel free to post them here with a GraphHopper Maps
Link and optionally a GPX file (or via GPS Visualizer) for the
expected route.<br>
<br>
Regards,<br>
Peter.<br>
<br>
<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CADU5_BEOAPnugUYOOmtT3n7HktEDUJfx_dPo4bDPmEba2am8Fg@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div>
<div>
<div>Thanks for the quick responses. The old route did use
more cycleways so that seems to be the problem indeed.
I'll keep an eye on the gitbug issue.<br>
<br>
</div>
I've noticed that the GPS Visualizer link only works for a
few days. Here is the same route comparison for reference: <a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://www.dropbox.com/s/6ri4mjm5k4vv468/GraphHopper.html">https://www.dropbox.com/s/6ri4mjm5k4vv468/GraphHopper.html</a><br>
<br>
</div>
Keep up the good work!<br>
<br>
</div>
Peter<br>
</div>
<div class="gmail_extra"><br>
<br>
<div class="gmail_quote">On Thu, May 1, 2014 at 1:42 PM, Peter K
<span dir="ltr"><<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:peathal@yahoo.de" target="_blank">peathal@yahoo.de</a>></span>
wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0
.8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<div>Hey ratrun,<br>
<br>
really no problem. As you already noted this was also
more or less a limitation of graphhopper - will be
improved in the issue you mentioned.<br>
<br>
Regards,<br>
Peter.<br>
<br>
<br>
</div>
<div class="">
<blockquote type="cite"> Hello Peter,<br>
<br>
During the introduction of support for bicycle
relations the weighting of highways of type cycleway,
which are not part of a bicycle relation,
unintentionally decreased in comparison to the
previous versions. I guess that this is the difference
you are seeing, because in the Benelux there are lots
of cycleways. <br>
Peter intends to introduce a "preference routing"
feature shortly - see <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://github.com/graphhopper/graphhopper/issues/190"
target="_blank">https://github.com/graphhopper/graphhopper/issues/190</a>,
and I hope that this feature will allow easier tuning
between the "fastest" and the "safest, nice" route.<br>
<br>
regards,<br>
<br>
ratrun<br>
<br>
<div>Am 30.04.2014 22:33, schrieb Peter Bryan:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div>
<div>
<div>Hi all,<br>
<br>
</div>
The last few days (weeks?) I've noticed that
graphhopper routes for bicycles seem to have
changed. Previously, graphhopper would take
more bike friendly roads like bicycle paths or
quiet roads. Routes created today seem to take
bigger and busier roads, most suitable for
cars. Is there something wrong with bicycle
routing? Of course, I prefer cycle paths over
busy roads.<br>
<br>
</div>
<div>I've uploaded an example on GPS Visualizer
with an old and a new route between the same
locations: <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www.gpsvisualizer.com/display/20140430130842-45066-map.html"
target="_blank">http://www.gpsvisualizer.com/display/20140430130842-45066-map.html</a><br>
<br>
The old track (created in March) is much
better than the route I created today. I've
tried this on GPSies and <a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://graphhopper.com/maps"
target="_blank">graphhopper.com/maps</a>
with the same results. Routing between other
locations have the same problem.<br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
Thanks for looking into this!<br>
<br>
</div>
Peter<br>
</div>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>