Comment by Doctor_Fegg

2 years ago

Really interesting test case - thanks!

cycle.travel's scoring for the two routes differs by 0.4% so it's very close. In OSM data terms, the challenge is that there's no particular special tagging for the Sarphatistraat - it just gets classed as a "cycleway", same as the route along Mauritskade. Plus there's a couple of very slight advantages for the Panamalaan (which is tagged as part of a designated longer-distance bike route) and the Zeeburgerdijk/Mauritskade (which are beside water so get a scenic uplift).

I might look at doing some Amsterdam-specific routing tweaks: I doubt the longer-distance bike route consideration should be relevant in this case, for example.

3 comments

Doctor_Fegg

Reply
mcv  2 years ago

It's true that Mauritskade is besides water, but it's also next to pretty heavy car traffic. Is it possible to give it a downgrade for that?

> I doubt the longer-distance bike route consideration should be relevant in this case

Or maybe it is, but then it's relevant for all routes involved, including the Sarphatistraat (which is short distance for cars, but long distance for bikes).

  • mcv  2 years ago

    Also worth pointing out: the very first part of the Sarphatistraat that's skipped is a bike path between a grassy tramline and water, with the zoo on the other side of that water. Can't get much more scenic than that. It's significantly greener than the corresponding bit of Mauritskade.