# App: Improve rerouting settings **URL:** \ **Category:** Implemented features\ **Tags:** implemented\ **Created:** [April 21, 2020, 6:27am UTC](https://forum.kurviger.com/t/app-improve-rerouting-settings/3107 "2020-04-21T06:27:48Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 1\ **Showing post:** 17
**Author:** ![linux-user](https://forum.kurviger.com/user_avatar/forum.kurviger.com/linux-user/32/56_2.png) [@linux-user](https://forum.kurviger.com/u/linux-user)\ **Post date:** [April 29, 2020, 7:03am UTC](https://forum.kurviger.com/t/app-improve-rerouting-settings/3107/17 "2020-04-29T07:03:18Z")
Continuing the discussion from [Kurviger 1.13.5 (Beta)](https://forum.kurviger.com/t/kurviger-1-13-5-beta/2855/81): > [@Kurviger 1.13.16 (Beta)](https://forum.kurviger.com/t/kurviger-1-13-16-beta/2855/74): > > ![Kurviger](https://forum.kurviger.com/uploads/default/original/2X/1/12b88518faf67b5f80ee564e8c083203a1797744.png) > > Do we need all this rerouting options 🤔 > I think at the end two options should remain: > > - a **flexible** one, which allows automatic skipping of waypoints that are “behind” you. > - a **strict** one, which doesn’t omit waypoints. ## How do this rerouting options behave? - **Nearest point on route** : it’s the nearest coordinates on the route path (not waypoint). It does guide you back to the route as soon as possible (but does not prevent from skipping waypoints). This can mean that you are guided to a point you have already been. - **Nearest waypoint** : it’s the nearest waypoint (i.e. via points, destination) of the route. This allows to automatically skip waypoints. e.g. you can pass a waypoint on a street nearby. If a waypoint is _behind_ you it won’t route you back. - **Next waypoint** : it’s the next waypoint (i.e. via points, destination) that has not been passed yet. This is somehow a compromise between _Nearest waypoint_ and _Strict navigation_. Usually it does not allow to skip waypoints, with one exeption. If you are **on your route** , it does not guide you back, even if there are waypoints behind you, that you have not visited yet. - **Strict navigation** : It does never allow to skip a waypoint automatically. It does guide you to **every waypoint** you have not visited yet, even if that waypoint is already _behind_ you. If you want to skip a waypoint, you have to do it manually. ## Do we need all this options? There does not seem to be a common consent: - Some forum members say, the more options the better. Keep them all! - Some forum members are concerned about the complexity of the app. Do (novice) users understand the behavior of this options, or would they be confused? My personal opinion would be to keep only two: - _nearest waypoint_: - because this is the most **flexible** one, and allows seemless skipping of waypoints. - _strict navigation_ - because this is ensures, that you **don’t miss** any waypoints. ## What do others think. What rerouting options do you want to keep, and why? > [@luckytown](#): > > “Next waypoint” and “Strict navigation” should be maintained. I personally do not use the other two options. 🙂 > [@Kurviger 1.13.16 (Beta)](https://forum.kurviger.com/t/kurviger-1-13-16-beta/2855/81): > > I think “nearest route point” and “nearest waypoint” could be removed. I don’t think those options are very useful. But depending on the route and your current position they could have quite undesirable effects. > [@Kurviger 1.13.16 (Beta)](https://forum.kurviger.com/t/kurviger-1-13-16-beta/2855/78): > > WHO’s the one to decide, which options are more useful and which are less useful? > Only in very few cases can an agreement be reached. > And then any restriction of options is a loss for at least one part of the target group. > Therefore, it is better to leave the options as they are, if they have already been implemented by the developers, i.e. do not require new efforts. > [@Kurviger 1.13.16 (Beta)](https://forum.kurviger.com/t/kurviger-1-13-16-beta/2855/80): > > > [@Kurviger 1.13.16 (Beta)](https://forum.kurviger.com/t/kurviger-1-13-16-beta/2855/78): > > > > Therefore, it is better to leave the options as they are, if they have already been implemented by the developers, i.e. do not require new efforts. > > I agree … and I’d like to keep the [“Settings | Routing | Waypoints in instructions”](https://forum.kurviger.com/t/ansage-wegpunkte-abschalten/2815/7) for same reasons. --- _[View the full topic](https://forum.kurviger.com/t/app-improve-rerouting-settings/3107)._