Vehicle types/ Navigation types

[foxitrot]

An optional segment slope parameter or a "too steep" checkbox and corresponding client preference might be necessary for some vehicle types.

[foxitrot]

A navigation type that would utilise a generic economy algorithm would be useful, perhaps avoiding lots of stop-start situations...

...and detouring shorter lower-ranked roads over much longer (and usually similarly fast, but often slower) routes over higher-ranked roads.

An economic route type was promised many months ago IIRC, and should IMHO be implemented regardless of the planned low-road-types-pruning replacement.

[fvwazing]

Vehicletype: "Other vehicle" as a catchall for everything not foreseen. "Other" vehicles do not generate traffic/maperrors while they move around.

Vehicletype: cab/taxi
Roadtypeflag: taxi allowed. Taxis (with permit) are allowed to drive thru certain pedestrian zones. So - will a "pedestrian boardwalk" with taxis enabled be routable for taxis? Oh, and this is not allowed during shopping-times so time dependency please.

[fvwazing]

Please, do NOT add cyclists and pedestrians to the set. Any new vehicles should be able to drive (a subset of) the car-network.

(I previously argued that cabs should be able to navigate the pedestrian zone at certain times. That could be done with other types than pedestrian boardwalk.)

[fvwazing]

I think the most logical solution is to disregard data from motorcyclists.

Not necessarily so.
If a MC is slow it could generate a jam. If it is faster than a (previously reported) jam it could be ignored. And every type of vehicle should have its own speedprofile for every segment as to not mess up speeddata for other vehicle types (until enough MC-data is collected the car-data applies).

[fvwazing]

Vehicletype: emergency response vehicle (ambulance, firetruck)

In all(?) developed countries these vehicles are equipped with expensive custom-made GPS-units that rely on finetuned maps. In most developing countries this is not the case, and Waze could help them out. This type of vehicle would be able to drive anywhere a road is without triggering maperrors or clearing trafficjams. In handselected streets they could be allowed to drive AGAINST traffic (sirenes and flashlight assumed to be on). As an added extra they could be made visible flashing on the map and Wazers in their path could be warned to give way a minute in advance. (Yeah, I am awake - just daydreaming here).

[fvwazing]

Please, do NOT add cyclists and pedestrians to the set. Any new vehicles should be able to drive (a subset of) the car-network.

How exactly are bicycles different in this discussion from long-haul trucks? Restrictions on where they can drive, potential impact to the average speed on the chosen roadway, etc. I would consider it an advantage while driving to know that both are on my route.

Bicycles would need so many extra connections, they would double the volume of the map where I live. All that trouble - to plan a trafficfree route for cyclists. They don't get stuck in traffic, anyway. Before they do get stuck in traffic they cut a corner over a boardwalk. Even if you managed to present them with a perfect route they would ignore it. (I know because I am a parttime cyclist myself). Not worth the trouble. Do not bother with bicycles until - well, until the last street has housenumbers (another way to say never).

Trucks would need only a handful of changes to existing roads to make them perfectly happy.

[fvwazing]

It may be different in the states - but DUTCH cyclists are notorious!

[fvwazing]

It may be different in the states - but DUTCH cyclists are notorious!

All the more reason to know where they are.

Dude, they are in front/left/right & on top of you.

An american astonished about dutch cyclists: http://www.ski-epic.com/amsterdam_bicycles/

"This particular 3-way corner is INCREDIBLY busy with bicycles, cars, and pedestrians, and the traffic pattern is completely random. There don't seem to be any clearly defined rules of engagement -> from all directions bicycles and cars just whiz into the intersection and deal with whatever happens the best they can."

[fvwazing]

For example, bicycles. We know people use Waze on bicycles, so if we have a bicycle option for them to pick, I bet they are more likely to do so. Especially if it makes their icon into a bicycle

They don't need to know the details that it behaves the same as if they picked "other" and we and Waze don't need to do anything beyond setting up the "other" option.

And if sometime in the future we actually do support bicycles in a more complex manner, then the backend can change and the client already is set to bicycle.

Yeah, give them an option "bicycle" and an icon. Even if this doesn't do a thing, in every town you will have 2 or 3 fanatic cyclists that will take that as an encouragement to map cycleroads. These 2 or 3 are the only customers waze will win by this - and probably the last customers, too.

I have often scolded Amsterdam cyclists for screwing up directions. I seriously thought that I would find hordes of them - hey, Amsterdam is the bicycle capital of the world. Careful study of the damage and patterns over the last weeks shows that all the damage by cycles in Amsterdam comes from a handful. I estimate now that far less than 5% of rides are bicycles. That is enough to screw up the map every couple of weeks and that is about half of the gain Waze can get from supporting cyclists in Amsterdam.

Google now supports bicycles. I looked at their map in my hood, and it is far from correct for cycles. It would take about twice as much change to do it right. All that for the benefit of a handful.... do the math.

Trucks and cabs, on the other hand, only need a handful of changes to existing roads (mostly) to make them completely happy. They spend all their working hours in traffic, adding benefit for Waze.