Evaluation criteria of a recommended route
Table of contents
Evaluation matrix
| Criteria | Objective | Evaluation |
|---|---|---|
| Title of the route |
The route’s title should reflect its content. Certain words are penalised because they do not contribute to the quality of the title. |
|
| Description of the route | The route’s description should consist of several sentences and reflect the context of the route. Certain words are penalised because they do not contribute to the quality of the description. |
|
| Route geometry | The shape or geometry of the route is evaluated objectively. For example, long straight stretches without waypoints are penalised, as are routes with an unrealistic number of left-right turns at sharp angles. |
|
| Route type | The route type should be as specific as possible and correspond to the activity mentioned in the route’s description. For example, instead of using the general route type 'Cycle route', choose a more specific type, such as 'Race cycle route' or 'Recreational cycle route', depending on the activity for which this route is suitable. Find out why we think this is important. |
|
| Recognised paths and roads | Try to avoid route sections that are manually drawn or not recalculated. Find out why we think it is important that as much of a route as possible is (re)calculated according to our recognised road and path network. |
|
| Minimum distance | It is assumed that a route will have a minimum distance depending on its type and intended use. For example, walkers cover different distances than cyclists and cyclists travel different distances than motorcyclists. |
|
| Routing options | A route, and thus also the routing options used while planning it, must be suitable for the chosen route type. If you choose a routing option that is not suitable for a certain route type, there is a risk that the route will cover unsuitable or inaccessible roads. Read more about our routing options here. |
|
| Road features | Certain road features are unsuitable for specific activities. On the other hand, certain road features are very important for the enjoyment of a route. Therefore, all roads and paths included in a route should be suitable for the chosen route type.Find out how we set up our pavement classification. |
|
| Author rating | Authors with a higher author rating receive more trust. Find out how we determine the author rating. |
|
| Points of interest | Enriched routes are more fun. That is why it is important that relevant and detailed points of interest are added to a route. |
|
| Favorites | Confirmation from the RouteYou community gives us greater confidence to label a route as recommended. Find out what favourites are. |
|
| Own media | Once again, the more the better. Relevant own media linked to a route makes it better and thus more enjoyable. |
|
On this page we explain how you can improve your route.
Frequently asked questions
How do we evaluate a route?
When evaluating a recommended route, an objective assessment is made of the extent to which the proposed route meets the RouteYou quality criteria. If these criteria are not conclusive, the recommendation is submitted to one of our experts. In the evaluation matrix you will find an overview of the measured criteria, the objective behind each specific criterion and an explanation of how it is evaluated.
Of course, it is possible that certain routes do not qualify for a higher score according to the mentioned criteria, but still deserve one. Send your route to [email protected] and let one of our experts have a look at your route.
As a TOR you can do more
We place more value on the feedback of TORs (or Trusted Observers of Routes) during the evaluation process. As a TOR you are one of our community experts who has an eye for beautiful routes, both your own and those of other authors. Read more about our experienced authors or TORs here. If you want to become a TOR yourself, don't hesitate to contact us at [email protected].