this is way cool!!! thx!
I had this idea for so long but only now find that it already exist for quite some time.
I'm a runner and like to explore new routes especially new trails (avoid paved road if possible and prefer trails. osm: track/path)
Would it be possible to have such option eg. an try to avoid paved roads option.
Let me look into it. At the moment the best you can do is check the "Settings". In the Google Maps version, you can select the "Walk/Run" layer which may help. But there is not much control when using Google routing.
The OSM version offers more flexibility in the routing options, so I'll take a look to see if there are any options that I could expose that would give you what you want.
So I just checked the API, and I realize that I have already made it possible, at least somewhat, in the OSM version to do what you want. Under "Settings" you should click all of the options on "Try to Avoid" other than "Unpaved". That should mean that the routing algorithm will try and avoid everything other than unpaved roads, which is pretty much the same as trying to use as many unpaved roads as possible.
Have you tried that? If so, is it doing anything useful?
thanks for checking!
yeah actually right now I basically use such settings now ;)
... with the OSM version, I prefer that one, since it includes trail that I know (or even added myself) so its sometimes easier to judge from the map on the type of track.
what I observe is that, let's say I put the start/end point into some city (71034 boeblingen, germany in my case) and there's surrounding forests and other cities or villages nearby.
then I usually get circles or 8-shaped (start point in the center) tracks where the routing also could go mostly on paved roads through the city.
I'm not sure though whether this could be changed in any way by putting more focus on the surface type, or if it is a more general routing "problem" where the options if you generate only a "short" 10-20 mile round-loop-track are limited by other means.
so maybe setting options on the "shape" of the track might make sense as well. eg. allow for more "zig-zag" course or more "crossings" (loops in loops, 8-in-8 ... )
One more thing I observed is that the direction settings seems to be ignored or not working, but it might need just some more tries ;)
so thanks again, great tool which I already find very useful.