No client turn instruction with only enabled turn of 2+

[kentsmith9]

I have two concerns with that proposal:

1. It was working fine for months. We should not have to update every segment on the map to adapt to changes to the back end that we don't even know were intentional. Ehud also mentioned we should not try to work around things that appear broken because they are constantly making changes that may or may not stay.

2. I am pretty sure that I found when you have unnamed segments, the turn by turn instructions on the client show "..." for those unnamed segments. I have personally experienced the problem and when trying to determine which route to take the turn by turn instructions left out major named turns, so I was not sure what route it was actually taking. After filling in all the segment names it worked fine.

[CBenson]

I have two concerns with that proposal:

1. It was working fine for months. We should not have to update every segment on the map to adapt to changes to the back end that we don't even know were intentional. Ehud also mentioned we should not try to work around things that appear broken because they are constantly making changes that may or may not stay.

I'm obviously not familiar with the particular intersection, but it to me that way things are working now seem logical and straight-forward. So the current way thing are working doesn't really appear broken to me.

2. I am pretty sure that I found when you have unnamed segments, the turn by turn instructions on the client show "..." for those unnamed segments. I have personally experienced the problem and when trying to determine which route to take the turn by turn instructions left out major named turns, so I was not sure what route it was actually taking. After filling in all the segment names it worked fine.

On my client, the unnamed segments have no name in the navigation list as shown in the screen shot earlier in the thread. But the name of the next segment does show in the navigation bar and is spoken by the TTS when routing.

[kentsmith9]

I have two concerns with that proposal:

1. It was working fine for months. We should not have to update every segment on the map to adapt to changes to the back end that we don't even know were intentional. Ehud also mentioned we should not try to work around things that appear broken because they are constantly making changes that may or may not stay.

I'm obviously not familiar with the particular intersection, but it to me that way things are working now seem logical and straight-forward. So the current way thing are working doesn't really appear broken to me.

Either way it was working differently in the past and now it changed. We have to change our mapping to support the back end change. In principal that to me is a problem unless it was changed on purpose and improves some other issue, but I guess we will not know from Waze. As it is we set up freeway intersections like this due to other routing issues taking people off the freeway to follow the ramps just to get back on. Now we have to make another change to all those intersections around here when this routing fails. Currently this intersection is not giving guidance for taking the ramp off the freeway vs on the freeway. If the only option is to remove ramp names, how do we know that will not break yet something else in the future? I will have to admit this is getting pretty frustrating changing perfectly operating parts of the map, and that is what I heard Ehud say we should not be doing.

2. I am pretty sure that I found when you have unnamed segments, the turn by turn instructions on the client show "..." for those unnamed segments. I have personally experienced the problem and when trying to determine which route to take the turn by turn instructions left out major named turns, so I was not sure what route it was actually taking. After filling in all the segment names it worked fine.

On my client, the unnamed segments have no name in the navigation list as shown in the screen shot earlier in the thread. But the name of the next segment does show in the navigation bar and is spoken by the TTS when routing.

I will have to take a closer look at some routes that have this "..." issue again. I am pretty sure during the meetup bgodette saw this same issue when we were driving to San Francisco through areas I have not yet fixed by naming segments necessary for guidance. I will study more when I return from my travels out of the US for the next few weeks.

[AlanOfTheBerg]

Either way it was working differently in the past and now it changed. We have to change our mapping to support the back end change.

I am not 100% convinced of this as the standard mapping procedure I've always employed the no-name segments in order to produce proper instructions at the appropriate places. And I have not seen it work when the interim segments were named. That being said, if it truly did work before with all segments being named, I can't explain why it doesn't now. Additionally, if the segments are all the same type and all three (parent+two child) segments have different names, my understanding is that it should always announce the two children. In fact, I hear it announce both names even when one of the names is the same as the parent. But perhaps ramps have been an exception? Dunno. Can't exactly explain it, and what you're saying, Kent, differs from my experience with these types of limited access interchanges.

[kentsmith9]

Can't exactly explain it, and what you're saying, Kent, differs from my experience with these types of limited access interchanges.

Yes I am confident the ramp directions were being announced (up until about the time of the new client) when all were named and they were typically all different names without any workarounds.