Combining elevation & routing data to form chart
NomadicDeveloper22 opened this issue · 2 comments
I have a have a separate api to load elevation data. And I followed the tutorial on how to use routing. But I need to combine the two
How would I accomplish this? in simple terms at least. I looked at the actual responses from the navigation server and it just provides bearings from each intersection. Which isn't enough information
My best guess was using projection somehow to get the coordinates under the line being displayed, but I have only used it once to get the coordinates of where the user clicked
I know you prefer questions on stack overflow, but I posted a question there and haven't received a response
If your separate API is not able to provide you an elevation for any GeoPoint, I don't see how you could combine both...
Note that GraphHopper routing service provides elevation data. Under OBP, you can activate the option with:
GraphHopperRoadManager .setElevation(true);
Then, each GeoPoint of your route.mRouteHigh will have its elevation value.
at the time of writing this, I have found mRouteHigh from road manager to be probably the best solution for my situation
My api was able to provide elevation data for geopoints. The struggle was filling in the data between intersections. Which it seem like that was all that the road manager was able to return
I even experimented with creating my own methods around http requests using: https://routing.openstreetmap.de/routed-car/route/v1/driving/"+locations+"?alternatives=false&overview=full&steps=true
getting the elevation for each location returned in json, and this also only returned data at hard turns, or intersections
I also did try GraphHopper, but that seemed like the same thing but just built-in (and pricey for commercial purposes)
so ultimately it seems road.mRouteHigh is the only realistic way for me to get a really big list of as much goepoints as possible to send to the api and return detailed elevation data
Sorry for posting this here, but it seemed like this was too specific for even stackoverflow