# App: Waypoint types **URL:** \ **Category:** Implemented features\ **Tags:** implemented\ **Created:** [March 16, 2020, 5:08pm UTC](https://forum.kurviger.com/t/app-waypoint-types/2821 "2020-03-16T17:08:29Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 1\ **Showing post:** 29
**Author:** ![SchlesiM](https://forum.kurviger.com/user_avatar/forum.kurviger.com/schlesim/32/1080_2.png) [@SchlesiM](https://forum.kurviger.com/u/SchlesiM)\ **Post date:** [April 8, 2020, 12:13pm UTC](https://forum.kurviger.com/t/app-waypoint-types/2821/29 "2020-04-08T12:13:27Z")
> [@Kurviger 1.13.16 (Beta)](https://forum.kurviger.com/t/kurviger-1-13-16-beta/2855/38): > > ViaPoints have to be reached - so if you do not Skip them manually, Garmin Navigators might guide you backwards on the planned route to the “not reached” ViaPoint. > [@Kurviger 1.13.16 (Beta)](https://forum.kurviger.com/t/kurviger-1-13-16-beta/2855/35): > > So seems like having an extra setting: use shaping points in rerouting? > [@linux-user](#): > > stopover points (or viaPoints) → must not be skipped automaticaly That’s exactly what I meant by asking how shaping points will be handled in case of rerouting. In my opinion a differentiation would be a helpful (and consequent) addition to the way those both types are displayed. Therefore there would be 2 types of waypoints: - shaping-points: can be omitted in case of rerouting - visit-points (or via-points): cannot be ommitted automatically (only the user deletes them, changes them into a shaping-point or uses the “skip next waypoint” function) Would solve various situations (like already discussed [here](https://forum.kurviger.com/t/rerouting-changes-the-planned-route/1801/36) or [here](https://forum.kurviger.com/t/rerouting-changes-the-planned-route/1801/48), for example). I think there wouldn’t be any new/addtional UI elements necessary to support such a behaviour because its just the internal logic of the rerouting algorithm. --- _[View the full topic](https://forum.kurviger.com/t/app-waypoint-types/2821)._