Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Total length in meter #38

Closed
ghost opened this issue Nov 29, 2015 · 8 comments
Closed

Total length in meter #38

ghost opened this issue Nov 29, 2015 · 8 comments
Milestone

Comments

@ghost
Copy link

ghost commented Nov 29, 2015

When comparing different routes, it would be helpful, if the user could see the distance in meter (maybe as tooltip?)

@poutnikl
Copy link

But Brouter web already displays the distance on the left, if you mean the total one.

@ghost
Copy link
Author

ghost commented Dec 1, 2015

Actual it is Length: 24.6 km,
but Length: 24.699 km would be more precise.

@poutnikl
Copy link

poutnikl commented Dec 1, 2015

Well, are you aware that referring the route length by 5 valid digit precission is nonsense in mathematical and physical point of view, when the accuracy is much worse ?

Similarly, accuracy of determining the way length by an bicycle odometer is much worse than the odometer precision.

@ghost
Copy link
Author

ghost commented Dec 1, 2015

I am sorry, but I think your answer is not constructive.

But I can explain it in other words.
It would be helpful to see the distance in meter. For example route one is 24699 m and route two 24695 m. Right now you cannot see such small differences. This would help to determine, if costs in total are higher because of a longer way or a more "difficult" way.

@poutnikl
Copy link

poutnikl commented Dec 1, 2015

Why do you think it is not constructive ?

The length determination resolution is let say 1 m.
The length determination precision ( mean error of repeated determination ) is even better, 0 m.
The length determination accuracy ( error wrt to real value ) is hardly much better than 1% of the length.

if there is one value 24699 +/- 200 and the other 24695 +/- 200, the the last 2 digits and the difference 4 are statistically insignificant. That means the probability the difference is cause by random effects is very close to 100%. By other words, high precision and resolution without good enough accuracy is useless.

IMHO, much more useful parameter would be a mean costfactor = cost / length, with no reason for more than 3-4 digits,
See also #39

@nrenner
Copy link
Owner

nrenner commented Jan 7, 2016

I missed a more precise format when comparing short walking distances myself. But I would like to keep the short formatting as it is easier to read and usually precise enough.

One idea was to show more digits when the length is lower than 10 km, but that wouldn't help with your example of 24.6 km and using multiple formats might be confusing.

Using a tooltip might be an idea but is not ideal as you can't see both values at once when comparing using two windows. Maybe switching formats on click might be an idea.

@ghost
Copy link
Author

ghost commented Jan 7, 2016

I'm fine with a tooltip.

@nrenner nrenner added this to the 0.6.0 milestone Jun 8, 2016
@nrenner nrenner closed this as completed in 0bffe0c Jun 8, 2016
@ghost
Copy link
Author

ghost commented Jun 8, 2016

Thanks.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants