Request for enhancement - use markers when planning a route

I debated with myself for a long time before deciding to at least post the request - of course you're always free to reject it if it doesn't fit with whatever directions you want to take c.t.

The title says it all, really. But for clarification, I do NOT wish for this to go the "whole hog everything a huge interlocked database" like Garmin's Basecamp (shudder!) OK, it was kind'a cool the first few times a whole bunch of routes got recalculated because they all happened to share the waypoint that I just moved, but after a few hundred of them it gets old, VERY old!

So a way I envision this would be to make it possible to enter the name of one of my markers in the text-entry fields like "Where to?" or "Find" or in the "add via point" dialogue. Just to get the lat/long coordinates into the route, mind you, NOT any kind of db reference. Seeing the route go by the marker's symbol is absolutely perfect. If it is necessary to differentiate between "marker" and "stuff in OSM" then maybe some magic leading character as a tag? "@" seems popular for such things these days.

Resuming a route

Yesterday I made my first attempt at using c.t as my primary navigation support. It was along roads that I already knew well and I also had my old Garmin on, for comparison, but I wanted to give c.t a chance.

It worked beautifully until lunch but by then the phone's battery was running low so I turned off c.t, hung around and ate well for an hour before resuming my ride. And c.t did NOT play well after that! It cheerfully chimed "you have arrived" and stopped when in reality I still had some 25 km to go. I tried it several times and always got the same result. It showed my correct location on the map and the route was there but still maintained that "you have arrived".

This cuts into the usefulness of c.t significantly. There are multiple scenarios where one might want to stop before the planned end of a route and then resume it later.

So, am I doing something wrong? Is there some way to tell the c.t app that I'm still on the road and would like to pick it up from here and continue?

Making a route recalculate in the Android app

The weather was (relatively) clement the other day so I took my bike out for a quick pilgrimage to two bike stores. I also saw this as a good occasion to "get the feel" for riding with the c.t app as my primary navigation tool. I created a route to the first store in the c.t web tool, synced it over to my Android phone and set out. The route looked fine and after my GPS position had been found (always takes a bit of time in the "city canyons" around here) I got rolling. But after a while I decided to test what would happen if I deviated from the planned route, so I overshot a turn and entered a parallel street to where I was supposed to be. I expected the navigation to recalculate and give me an updated route after I'd been off-track for a while, but no. I could see the planned route a city block (about 100 m) to my left of the "you are here" dot and that was it.

Since the first store didn't have what I wanted, I then set off for the second one, right across town to the other side. This time I entered the address manually in the Android app and it, too, gave a good route proposal, but of course, I didn't stick to it. Same thing happened - I could see the calculated route off to my left, a lot further away this time, but nothing happened, no recalculation/update.

Now, based on my previous experiences with Garmin navigators on bikes as well as with Google Maps and Waze in cars, I've grown accustomed to the navigation software detecting my going too far off a proposed route and recalculating it, but this did not seem to happen here. I can see that there's some logic to the YAFIYGI ("You Asked For It - You Got It") mind set (I'm old enough to have worked with text-processing systems before WYSIWYG editors) and I could probably learn to live with it, IF there's a "recalculate" button somewhere that I can hit to manually force it if, say, something has happened so a large chunk of my planned route is inaccessible. Flooding, avalanches, terrorist attacks, whatever. Of course I realize that this can be done in multiple ways. Nearest route to the next via point or the destination. Nearest route to the nearest point on the original one. This is all "prior art" (Garmin, Google and Waze all do it. I haven't tried it on Osmand yet) so it's definitely doable. And I can't really think I'm the only one this has happened to, so, what am I missing?

RFE: Make via point note text visible in Android app

The title is really self-explanatory. I'd find it very helpful if it were possible to see the note text from a via point in the Android app. To me, that would serve as a reminder exactly why I made that note, so as an example it could be the closest point to some food store where I might consider to shop, if I happen to be passing there at a convenient time. For extra bells and whistles, a checkbox in the note editing dialog could serve as an indicator whether or not this is something I'd like to pop up on my screen as I approach the via point (the note MIGHT be just for my route planning purposes and irrelevant when I'm on the road).

Edit: I just noticed that this overlaps with a comment from Hobbes on my "Personal POI" request. See? This is definitely something we need! ;-)

Goodbye yellow brick road?

In Germany and the Netherlands it is common practice to use bricks or tiles on some streets and cycle paths as a means to calm down traffic and make a distinction between "country" and "town". I've noticed that in c.t routes such stretches get highlighted in green if my preference is set to "any", which I thought would indicate that they're unpaved, but if I switch my preference to paved only, the route remains the same but the green color goes away. And a couple of looks at samples in Google streetview shows that this happens exactly on stretches that have tiles or bricks.

Now, I have no serious objection to this and I certainly don't mind riding on tiles, but I *do* dislike long stretches of gravel paths (or at least want to look at them in advance to assure myself that they're not too loose) so I'd really like if it were possible to somehow tell the difference between unpaved (gravel/dirt/sand) and tiles/bricks. I'm assuming this is all info that comes out of OSM so how is it classified there? Do they lump together tiles, bricks, gravel, dirt and sand as all the same? That would seem rather crude to me.

Edit: and what about cobbles?