Eraser strongly disfavors SF Muni buses

mapzen / eraser-map

Privacy-focused mapping application for Android

GNU General Public License v3.0

75 stars 24 forks source link

Eraser strongly disfavors SF Muni buses #833

Open dhogan-io opened 6 years ago

dhogan-io commented 6 years ago

Device name: Google Pixel
Android Version: 7
App build number: 0.14.1
What did you expected to happen? When routing within SF, Eraser is very resistant to give a route that includes a Muni bus ride. It will often suggest walking to a light rail line, taking the light rail, then walking to your destination, even if the nearest light rail station is quite far. This can add substantial distance and time.
Steps to reproduce: Use multimodal transit routing in SF. The effect is especially obvious if you route between two points on the same bus line.

Your turn-by-turn service does not seem to have an issue with Muni buses, as demonstrated here.

msmollin commented 6 years ago

Hi @danielwhogan thanks for the feedback. This is similar to your other issue you opened here: https://github.com/mapzen/eraser-map/issues/828 from the sounds of it? I'm going to close this one in favor of keeping the work under 1 ticket; we're hoping to be able to devote some time to EM for this in the near future. Let us know if there's any reason you think we should have both issues :)

dhogan-io commented 6 years ago

I believe that this issue and https://github.com/mapzen/eraser-map/issues/828 are different. https://github.com/mapzen/eraser-map/issues/828 causes Eraser to suggest that you walk along the bus line to the furthest stop that won't cause to miss the bus. This issue causes bus lines to be ignored completely.

For example, Muni 67 runs from 24th and Mission to Bernal Heights. If I stand at the bus stop at 24th and Mission a few minutes before the bus is scheduled to arrive and request a route to a 67 bus stop in Bernal Heights, Eraser suggests that I walk. Taking the bus would easily be 20 minutes faster than walking.

Thanks for the quick response.

msmollin commented 6 years ago

Ok I'll leave it open and think about this a bit. I think the way to solve it will be the same as the other issue - allowing users to force priority more for these kinds of things. However this can provide another testing case.