Wurde das jetzt schon bei der 1.13.4 eingearbeitet?
That is included too in Kurviger 1.13.16 (Beta).
1 Like
Kurviger 1.13.5 (Beta) is on Google Play (instructions):
- Navigation: strict route following (Pro)
Navigate along the route without shortcuts, i.e. follow the route strictly from one waypoint to another. When go off route, the rerouting tries to resume to the last omitted waypoint.
Available in âSettings | Navigation | Rerouting modeâ.
- Various improvements
2 Likes
Strict navigation is a very good improvement. Yesterday i ride a route where the way back crosses the route. Rerouting deletes all waypoints and wants me to navigate back home( last waypoint). I had to stop and reload the route after the crossing.
I am not sure about the other options, if they are all needed.
Keep up the good work.
1 Like
Ich habe heute die âStrikte Navigationâ ausprobiert. Sie macht das was Sie soll, das ist soweit gut. Allerdings gefĂ€llt mir âFolgender Wegpunktâ besser. Der Grund ist, ich habe Wegpunkt 1 ausgelassen, bin die Route aber weitergefahren. Habe die App neugestartet, da mein Ton weg war. Mit âStrikter Navigationâ wollte er halt immer zu Wegpunkt 1 zurĂŒck. Wenn Routen-Neuberechnungsmodus bereinigt werden sollte, wĂ€re ich dafĂŒr das âFolgender Modusâ und âStrikte Navigationâ bleiben. Die anderen beiden Punkte habe ich noch nie benutzt/gebraucht âŠ
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
I tried strict navigation today. Sheâs doing what sheâs supposed to, which is good so far. I like âFollowing Waypointâ better, though. The reason is, I left out waypoint one, but continued the route. Restarted the app because my sound was gone. With âStrict Navigationâ he always wanted to return to waypoint 1. If route recalculation mode should be cleaned up, I would stay in âFollowing Modeâ and âStrict Navigationâ. I have never used the other two points before âŠ
2 Likes
What is the difference between âNext waypointâ and âstrict navigationâ? For me those two options are not understandable intuitively.
Is âNext waypointâ still âNext unvisited waypointâ (as it was before)? And does âStrict navigationâ mean that it additionally considers shaping points?
Navigation (and rerouting) with âNext waypointâ is not strict, can still exit and resume route anywhere skipping intermediate waypoints automatically.
Cannot do that with âStrict navigationâ:
âNavigate along the route without shortcuts, i.e. follow the route strictly from one waypoint to another. When go off route, the rerouting tries to resume to the last omitted waypoint.â
âUnvisitedâ was a false term based on the above description.
Shaping points are considered after next waypoint, like discussed here for all rerouting modes.
1 Like
Concerning strict navigation I am over the moon. Unfortunately not about the weather, because that prevents me from trying it out right away. It works well when simulating. Even the manual skipping works like expected. I am confident that this will also work well in real operation. The next complex round trip is mine. 
1 Like
Thanks for your explanation. If Iâm using âstrict navigationâ and am forced to leave my route, will I then be navigated to the next omitted waypoint regardless what type it is (regular or shaping wapoint)? Or will I be navigated to omitted regular waypoints only? My question is related to my former posts concerning this function (like here or here). Or from other users (like here).
Shouldnât it have rerouted to nearest point on route at start of navigation?
Ich bin am Anfang mit âStrikte Navigationâ gefahren, auch nach dem âNeustartâ. Erst als ich ca. 2 km am WP1 vorbei war und Kurviger immer noch zu WP1 wollte, was in diesem Modus ja richtig ist, habe ich wieder auf âFolgender Wegpunktâ umgeschaltet.Worauf hin Kurviger zum WP2 sprang.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
I drove with âStrict Navigationâ in the beginning, even after the âRestartâ. Only when I had passed SS1 for about 2 km and Kurviger still wanted to go to SS1, which is correct in this mode, I switched back to âFollowing Waypointâ, whereupon Kurviger jumped to SS2.
Does this description explains that better?
Navigate along the route without shortcuts, i.e. follow the route strictly from one via point to another. When go off route, the rerouting tries to resume to the last omitted via point.
Essentially like discussed and agreed here, the shaping points are considered after the first via point that participates in rerouting.
1 Like
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 âbehindâ you.
- a strict one, which doesnât omit waypoints.
See my comment here
(App: Rerouting options - #26)
(we can also discuss that in the relevant topic)
I am available for changes if there is enough feedback - not many have participated so far.
Are there any DIS-advantages?
If not - me I always prefer more options compared to less.
1 Like
Ein Mehr an Auswahl kann aber Nutzer abschrecken, wenn es zu viel wird. Zumal ich nicht denke das sich Alle die FAQ oder das Handbuch durchlesen. Ich denke die Meisten werden sich, so wie ich, die App installieren und losfahren wollen. Ohne sich groĂ Gedanken machen zu mĂŒssen welche Einstellungen Jetzt die richtigen wĂ€ren. Deswegen finde ich Weniger aber BewĂ€hrtes persönlich besser.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
However, more choice can deter users when it becomes too much. Especially since I donât think that everybody reads the FAQ or the manual. I think most of them will want to install the app and get started, just like me. Without having to think about which settings are the right ones now. Thatâs why I personally find less but proven things better.
3 Likes
This we had discussed often in this forum as well.
Problem is:
WHOâs 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.
1 Like
Ich gebe Ihnen dahingehend Recht das die Funktionen momentan eingebaut sind. Was wir aber nicht vergessen dĂŒrfen, dies ist eine Beta-Version welche, meine Vermutung, nicht durch die breite Masse genutzt wird. Betas sind zum testen da, wenn festgestellt wird Ok das passt oder passt nicht, werden entsprechende Ănderungen vorgenommen oder alles gelassen wie es ist. Im Forum habe ich auch schon von @devemux86 gelesen, das nicht alles unumstöĂlich ist. Vielleicht hilft manchmal eine Umfrage weiter wer welche Funktion nutzt?
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
I agree that the functions are currently installed. But what we must not forget, this is a beta version which, my guess, is not used by the masses. Betas are there for testing, if it is found Ok that fits or does not fit, appropriate changes are made or everything is left as it is. In the forum I also read about @devemux86, that not everything is irrefutable. Maybe sometimes a poll helps who is using which function?
1 Like
I agree ⊠and Iâd like to keep the âSettings | Routing | Waypoints in instructionsâ for same reasons.
1 Like
Yes, absolutely. Now itâs clear that rerouting only considers the next regular (âviaâ) waypoint without loosing all the shaping waypoints following after it. Sounds quite perfect for me (will be tested as soon as possible). Thank you. 
I would agree with that. I think ânearest route pointâ and ânearest waypointâ could be removed. I donât think those options are very useful. But depending on the route and your current position they could have quite undesirable effects.
Hmmm, usually I also prefer to have different options to configure a tool for my personal preferences. But too many rerouting options may confuse unexperienced user (or those who didnât follow all the discussions in this forum 
).
Yes, reasonable point.
Hmmm, yes - maybe youâre right. Iâm really very torn âŠ