Footway preferred over cycling way

Discostu36 commented 1 year ago

Description

I have the "avoid unpaved ways" and "avoid footways" options activated in bicycle routing. This leads to this footway being preferred over this designated cycling path in bicycle routing.

If I turn off the "avoid unpaved ways" rule, the correct route is chosen.

Both ways have surface=paving_stones.

How to reproduce

Bicycle routing from 54.31530° N, 10.12210° E to 54.31456° N, 10.12231° E with these settings:

Map data: Schleswig-Holstein 2023-06-01 with Osmand Live.

Actual result

Footway is preferred over path with bicycle=designated with same surface.

Expected result

Cycling path should be preferred.

Environment OsmAnd Version: 4.3.12 Android/iOS version: Android 12 Device model: Fairphone 4

scaidermern commented 1 year ago

Both ways have surface=paving_stones.

Not exactly. The avoided way has cycleway:surface=paving_stones and footway:surface=paving_stones. So maybe this is because OsmAnd doesn't support these tags and thus has no knowledge about the surface?

Discostu36 commented 1 year ago

Thanks for the hint. I've changed that and will have a look in a few hours if the routing is fixed. If yes, I'll add a new issue as a feature request that, for bicycle routing, cycleway:surface should be considered.

Discostu36 commented 1 year ago

It was a good idea, but not the source of the problem. The avoided way now as surface=paving_stones, but the routing is still via the footway.

Discostu36 commented 1 year ago

The problem is a different one:

https://github.com/osmandapp/OsmAnd-resources/blob/master/routing/routing.xml#L1675-L1678

<if param="avoid_unpaved">
    <select value="0.3" t="highway" v="track"/>
    <select value="0.2" t="highway" v="path"/>
</if>

The parameter doesn't do what it says on the cover. It doesn't check for surfaces, but it does only penalize tracks and paths. The behaviour should be changed, or the option should be renamed to "avoid paths and tracks".

But I am still not quite sure if that is the (only) problem here, as the "avoid footways" parameter should have a much bigger influence on the routing:

<if param="avoid_footways">
  <select value="1.8" t="bicycle" v="official"/>
  <select value="1.8" t="bicycle" v="designated"/>
  <select value="1.3" t="bicycle" v="yes"/>
  <select value="0.1" t="highway" v="footway"/>
</if>

scaidermern commented 1 year ago

The problem is a different one:

https://github.com/osmandapp/OsmAnd-resources/blob/master/routing/routing.xml#L1675-L1678
<if param="avoid_unpaved">
    <select value="0.3" t="highway" v="track"/>
    <select value="0.2" t="highway" v="path"/>
</if>

This is indeed strange and misleading - and wrong. Any way can be unpaved. In contrast, tracks and path can be paved. So the current implementation is just plain wrong.

vshcherb commented 1 year ago

This is mostly true for tracks / paths allowed for vehicles. Anyway will be open for suggestions especially if we can test the idea somehow in general

scaidermern commented 1 year ago

Anyway will be open for suggestions especially if we can test the idea somehow in general

Which kind of suggestions?

This option should check the surface tags. A paved road has surface paved, asphalt, concrete, concrete:plates, concrete:lanes, paving_stones, sett, cobblestone, unhewn_cobblestone, metal, wood, tartan, ...

See https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/surface#values

yuriiurshuliak commented 1 year ago

In an attempt to reproduce this error, I entered the same settings as the user and navigated from point to point according to their coordinates. Currently, this bug is no longer reproduced. You can view it in our web version: https://osmand.net/map/?start=54.315300%2C10.122100&end=54.314560%2C10.122310&mode=bicycle#18/54.31495/10.12264

OsmAnd~ 4.5.0#351m, released: 2023-07-06

photo_2023-07-07_16-51-16

photo_2023-07-07_16-51-18

Discostu36 commented 1 year ago

The web version doesn't work for me, route calculation doesn't finish. But you have chosen a different driving style than I did.

vshcherb commented 1 year ago

Indeed cycling route has same cost - setting Use elevation data

Incorrect (37 seconds)
Correct (33 seconds)

It's strange cause cycling should have higher priority than footway, elevation data unlikely to influence that much

yuriiurshuliak commented 1 year ago

The bug has been resolved. After selecting the bicycle profile with all the specified settings, the navigation now correctly prefers the bike path when traveling from the starting point at coordinates 54.31528, 10.12205 to the destination point at coordinates 54.31456, 10.12230. You can access the preferred bike path using this link:: OpenStreetMap Bike Path.

For a web version of the navigation, you can visit the following link, which includes the specified start and finish coordinates, as well as the bicycle profile settings: Web Version Navigation.

OsmAnd~ 4.6.0#881m, released: 2023-10-17

Discostu36 commented 1 year ago

Thanks!

xmd5a2 commented 10 months ago

Looks like this is no longer reproducible ever with reverted commit

yuriiurshuliak commented 10 months ago

Currently, routes using the specified parameters are calculated identically. It is only worth noting that when the "avoid unpaved roads" option is enabled, it is calculated correctly in iOS, but in Android the road is calculated via footway. However, if you turn off this option, the route will be calculated correctly.

OsmAnd~ 4.6.0#1160m, released: 2023-12-05

Android	iOS	Web

Discostu36 commented 10 months ago

Ok, so the original bug still exists as reported in the original post. @xmd5a2 could you reopen?

xmd5a2 commented 10 months ago

I think it is fixed finally

yuriiurshuliak commented 10 months ago

Unfortunately, the bug was not fixed. I updated the maps and the app, but with the "avoid unpaved roads" option enabled, the route is calculated incorrectly. On the Web version and iOS, the route is calculated correctly, regardless of the "avoid unpaved roads" option.

OsmAnd~ 4.6.0#1181m, released: 2023-12-09