CBenson wrote:I always thought the "to" was needed to distinguish from the actual road. Not so important if the sign has the control city, but if it doesn't you need to say "to I-95 N" rather than just "I-95 N" on the ramp.
FrisbeeDog wrote:I'm not in favor of having multiple colons. It looks funny to me and is something you would never do grammatically. I know what we are doing is shorthand for directions, but I think we do need to follow some rules of punctuation usage.
Someone had said that the request was made to have the slash also execute a pause so I say we keep the current standard with one Colin have the exit number and patiently wait for Waze to update the TTS.
What we also have to keep in mind is that not everyone wants TTS so we want to keep the ramp name clear too and I think the additional colons makes that confusing.
AlanOfTheBerg wrote:I'm ok with the double colon idea for exit ramps, but I do think it looks odd like others have noted. Even though it is two more characters, I personally prefer "Exit 220: I-310 S to Boutte / Houma". Due to screen space available, it's not optimal, of course, but it's more accurate. For really long signs with multiple routes and control cities, a colon or "to" isn't going to make a difference on what fits on the screen because most of it doesn't anyway.
On-ramp naming has long been a peeve of mine. I think we can have it such that if there is a control city or destination, we can eliminate the word "to" and use the convention similar to off-ramps. But if there is only a ramp going to a route, then having the word "to" remains important to keep the ramp name different from the route.
jasonh300 wrote:I do think each onramp should have a control city, whether it's signed or not. The control city remains the same until you're past that city and then the control city changes. I've always been able to find a sign by an onramp (not EVERY onramp) between major cities to tell me what those control cities should be. There probably are examples where there are no such signs, but common sense should tell you what the major cities are.
I assume Slidell, LA is only a control city because three major interstates intersect there.
My only question is what control city to use when you're inside of a city with a lot of exits. If you get on an onramp in the middle of New Orleans, you're going to New Orleans regardless of which way you go, so do you jump to the next control city (Slidell or Baton Rouge)?
AlanOfTheBerg wrote:tibble wrote:Exit 298: 1-176 / PA-10: Morgantown / Reading
That's how I do it now, but to make the TTS sound best, I think it would be Exit 298: I-176 to Morgantown / PA-10 to Reading.
AlanOfTheBerg wrote:The only exception I employ for not putting ALL the info on the sign into a single segment is when a ramp exits to two distinct exits and the BGS for the first ramp shows both the exit numbers.
For example, ramp exits with BGS showing "Exit 12A: I-95 N / Cityname1 ; Exit 12B: I-95 S / Cityname2" and then down the ramp is a split in some manner into both ramps. This BGS is too long for a single segment name to be useful and to have TTS fit into an announcement before the next split into the actual ramp happens. TTS would be too late.
The standard agreed to in previous ramp name threads (I think it was agreed to) is to not name the first segment, and let the next ramp segments be named and propagate "backward" so that if the driver is heading to 12A, they will get "Exit 12A: I-95 N / Cityname1" for the first exit and the next, which will match part of the first BGS they see, and will match the second BGS they see.
banished wrote: I am having to go back and fix ramps were people added the double-colon in my local area to get those segments into conformity with our agreement.
FrisbeeDog wrote:If we start linking roads and cities then we start reorganizing the signs. So no longer do the segment names correspond to the way people read (right to left, top to bottom), but start jumping all over the place. I think this becomes confusing to the driver and is distracting. It also introduces further complexity for the editor because they then have to link the roads and city names. This requires even more work and sometimes isn't the easiest thing to do as that information is not always apparent from what is provided on the exit sign.
Users browsing this forum: flyingout