Messages

An wen genau richtet sich die Frage?
Welches anweisung methode  ?
TTS oder die anweisung wie in Voice Morse ?
Aber nur auf Via Points beschränkt ?

Mute: Nothing is announced.
NSLA: No slight turns announced.
Via: Only Via points announced.

Unzip the attached Morse.zip file into the Locus folder as indicated in the image.
At navigation set Voice: "Morse codes -international". (Via point support).

Überprüfen Sie auch die Einstellungen in der ausgewählten und verwendeten Voreinstellung.

I think I missed something important. How works the "trackglitch detector" ?

https://t.ly/3M6e
Notice:  NEVER place the shaping points on intersections!
There is not much publicity given to this nevertheless useful tool.
It works best with these track files as are produced by  BRouter.
https://t.ly/ULDC

And if there is a crossing in the distance of x meters. Then Locus sets the point not exactly at 500 meters, but x meters after the intersection.

How can Locus known there is a crossing before the creation of the new map matched track/route ?
First you can just accept that there is or will be mistakes. This by a trackglitch and thereby creates false instructions and a correcting U-turn. Notice the U-turns are positioned on the exact same location spot as the now map matched Planner (Via or Shaping) resulting trackpoint.
Be happy, so just let it happen. As you the user will be warned immediately ! These trackglitches are now nicely INDICATED by the Locus trackglitch detector tool. (Red circle)
What to do ?
Find the Route planner Point (Via or Shaping) and move this into a favarouble position further on the expected road direction or path, and so the indicator gets cleared now, and also the result will be fine.  (Yes the final correction is so still to do by some human planner operator interaction)

[Targets]

After importing the gpx into the route planner, some attached Shaping Points are now automatically offered in the Locus route planner.  I had a first test...sure works pretty nice usefull.

- By the way, you can also set Via Points as the default in the Locus route planner Settings.
- Only Turn and Via points lead to navigation alerts and give distance values @ navigation.

The planner point placement is random. It's hard to do otherwise since the (recorded) import track NOW is not yet matched with the BRouter osm data.
That will come later and that is precisely the final task that you want to accomplish by using the route planner.

The advantage is, if you now reposition one of the shaping points or create an additional one, you will not suddenly change the entire track loop (based on the imported track) total unexpectedly.
In short, you will only change a small segment at a time, possibly still drastically and unexpectedly ;-)
These unexpected larger deviations are of course also influenced by the selected Brouter routing profile in use. Select this as correctly as possible according to you expected usage.

Now it concerns only a small segment piece and so you have better control of it to produce your route as an "osm map matched track" slowly but controlled this segment by segment.
If you have the original track import then also presented in a different color then you have a perfect guide to accomplish this task quite comfortably.

I see that you also briefly mentioned Kurviger.

In Locus, the Shaping Points are only used as route reference points during the production of a map matched track route traject.
Once in the navigation and also by means of the gpx transfers this useful info is completely neglected and thus almost completely lost.
There is still a residual associated track point left but this is hardly reflected or found in the very large numbers of track points.
If you then also use Locus autorouting to point in the navigation, the useful shaping points are also not available anymore as point targets.

The big difference with the (imo) superior Kurviger results are therefore as follows:

Both the Via Points and the Shaping Points are neatly stored in the navigation as well as in the .kurviger file transfers.
In Kurviger the Via Points AND the Shaping Points are both planner router references as well as Targets in the navigation.
The autorecalculation in Kurviger is always directed to either a Via or a Shaping Point. Ready and clear known targets.

The difference is this.
A Via Point is announced in navigation both by audio TTS as well as visually.
A Shaping Point (= a muted Via Point) is therefore NOT announced.
Promoting a neatly kept Shaping Point to Via Point or vice versa is so very simple

very nice system IMHO

But only really VERY valuable if a track glitch detector (prevention) is also provided. And on condition that both the very useful Via and Shaping Planner points are transferred into the gpx file.  This nice web planner, especially the version of Marcus with its exceptionally fast updates, loses its "brilliance" because of an insufficiently performant gpx transfer mode. It can be done simply, very discreetly, and robustly. This has been amply demonstrated and tested.

A track glitch decetion and warning may be nice, but you also need to have the right tools to fix it. And you can do that on the condition that you fully respect and  preserves the cause of it, namely the planner point(s), and so can thus also reposition them.  Therefore both planner points must remain fully supported and available also after and through a gpx file transfer. Since this is the only transfer method for BRouter web, in contrast to the Locus 'Gold' eco system where the exchange is of course more direct. A question of customer loyalty ;-)

put me in the penalty box.

I'm sorry, all seats are full. New bookings will be refused. 

Thanks for the screenshots.
I hadn't really understood the actual question that well in your long video with your own local [EN] version.
My hearing is already not as optimal as it once was, and I do speak a mother tongue other than EN(US)
Basic [EN] with very good articulation as the school teacher(s) may teach it can just about do it ;-)

The screenshots.
If the source material you are going to cut and weld is not 100% exactly the same, so  you will see this in the result.

So first you took a piece away from the original track, the path that runs along the lake.
Then you designed a new part of the track which will run along that highway.  Correct?

This newly designed segment will then be placed in the empty "hole". At the welding places you will see small deviations.
It doesn't bother me at all....but admittedly it is not the perfection that you apparently expect here.
However, since there is no new complete track routing, these small deviations are not corrected.
Welding tracks together is a surgical job that you need to do partly manually and quite precisely.
I don't want to start such a complex and lengthy "welding" process. This example convinces me even more.

Imo you can more comfortably just redesign the whole trajectory through (a) new B_router routing.
By means of a retrace function where you place the original tracks as a reference template in the background.

Translated with www.DeepL.com/Translator (free version)

The attached tracks do consist out of multiple tracksegments.

By Topografix gpx 1.1 (http://www.topografix.com)

A Track Segment holds a list of Track Points which are logically connected in order.
To represent a single GPS track where GPS reception was lost, or the GPS receiver was turned off, start a new Track Segment for each continuous span of track data.

There are two common approaches to deal (display) a GPX track with multiple track segments:

1. DISPLAY.
- By Plotaroute, RWGPS, RTWtool, Garmin programs
- Ignore it so just connect the segments and show as a single track.
- Not correct imo as otherwise tracksegments had not te be invented.
   
2. DISPLAY.
- By Locus, Gpx editor, Gps Visualizer, Gps Prune, Gps Track Editor, GpXSee, Google Earth(kml), B_router web MyGPSFiles, gpxeditor.co.uk,
-  Show a gap between segments, so it does look like different tracks
-  All points inside a segment are drawn as one continous line..
-  A single track however can contain out of multiple segments.

Does the gap bother you visually? Functionally anyway, it just remains one track with some fully transparent straight connecting lines between the track segments. 
"You" can also 'stitch' them together in a slightly different way so that there is no visual gap in actual Locus and other apps.

@ Menion.
https://forum.locusmap.eu/index.php?topic=7831.msg67007#msg67007
I will report back, so here is the result. 
https:// will be added.  = Confirmed by the RouteYou developper

[Wenn]

Wenn (not yet) der Locus BRouter track jedoch ALLE Planungspunkte als Shaping oder Via beibehält, kann mann, wenn Sie möchten, auch später bequem segment teile ändern mit so nur geringem risiko, die gesamte ursprüngliche trackpath zu zerstören, da der ursprünglichen referenz planungspunkte allen perfect erhalten bleiben. Insbesondere bei Rundreisen verhindert dies auch, dass Sie nach einer automatischen Neuberechnung mit Punktpriorität einen sehr kurzen Routenvorschlag direkt zum Endziel erhalten.

[Kurviger-Universum]

Das ist natürlich völlig richtig, Steffen.
Ich verweise nur auf die hervorragende Unterstützung von sowohl Shaping Points als auch von Via Points in dass "Kurviger-Universum".
Ein Kurviger-Track-Export mit abbiegerichtungen ist so nur mit dem eigene privat entwickelten .kurviger-Track-Dateiformat möglich.
Aber auch Locus könnte dies genauso gut mit dem beliebteren einfachen gpx trackformat so tun.
Das alles so hinzufügen zu einem gpx-Track auf richtige robuste und sehr einfache weise ist kinderleicht.

Versuchen Sie mal, die folgende kurze Strecke zu importieren und öffnen Sie sie im den Locus Routenplaner. Ich sollte doch erwähnen, dass die Unterstützung von Shaping Points in Locus sowohl in der Navigation als auch in den gpx export dateien nicht in angebot ist.

Sowohl das Shaping als auch die Via Point unterstützung über die Web Planner export datei (und in der app navigation) sind nicht vorhanden.
Diese vom der benutzer erstellten Planer wegpunkte sind jedoch die grundlegenden arbeitspunkte, mit denen Sie später idealerweise weiter arbeiten müssen.

Web-Planer bieten immer noch keine bessere unterstützung für transfers der "Shaping Points" oder der so sehr nützliche (TTS) angekündigte "Via Points".