Navigation turning onto a railroad

by **fvwazing** » Fri Jun 29, 2012 8:34 pm

Mike-1323 wrote:
jasonh300 wrote:1. Having railroad on the map serves no purpose and adds no value to the map in most circumstances.

The best (possibly only) reason to have the railroad on the map is to prevent wazers on the train from contaminating the neighboring street speed data and generating a bunch of map problems as their track jumps from mapped road to mapped road. The best solution would be for wazers to turn off the app before getting on the train but barring that then having the tracks mapped is the next best solution. Of course, eliminating the "roads too far apart" map problem would be a considerable help as well.

As mentioned the mapped railroad should not have junctions with navigable streets and should have its level set at one of the extremes (-5, 9) so no map problems are generated.

In the Netherlands we see railroads often running very close to streets and we see all the problems that can come from that. Adding railroads fixes almost all the problems coming from mismatching with nearby roads. Because railroads are invisible in the client we still see traces of paving during trainrides. To discourage paving in trains it would be good if railroads were visible in the client and as a fix we started using the "Walking Trail"-type. Works like a charm if enabled in both directions, and looks ok in the client.

by **argus-cronos** » Sat Jun 30, 2012 8:28 am

fvwazing wrote:
In the Netherlands we see railroads often running very close to streets and we see all the problems that can come from that. Adding railroads fixes almost all the problems coming from mismatching with nearby roads. Because railroads are invisible in the client we still see traces of paving during trainrides. To discourage paving in trains it would be good if railroads were visible in the client and as a fix we started using the "Walking Trail"-type. Works like a charm if enabled in both directions, and looks ok in the client.

I was thinking the same but i've always thought that i'm alone with this opinion.

by **Mike-1323** » Sat Jun 30, 2012 12:03 pm

fvwazing wrote:In the Netherlands we see railroads often running very close to streets and we see all the problems that can come from that. Adding railroads fixes almost all the problems coming from mismatching with nearby roads. Because railroads are invisible in the client we still see traces of paving during trainrides. To discourage paving in trains it would be good if railroads were visible in the client and as a fix we started using the "Walking Trail"-type. Works like a charm if enabled in both directions, and looks ok in the client.

Well then perhaps we can lobby to get railroads to appear on the map. It would solve the problem you talked about and potentially eliminate some UR's I've seen around RR crossings.

by **mapcat** » Sat Jun 30, 2012 12:34 pm

If railroads appeared in the map, wouldn't that just encourage people to start adding useless (i.e. non-passenger) rail lines everywhere? I agree that it would be helpful to see them, but only some of them.

Also, if they're mapped already, why wouldn't paving be suppressed, like it is on existing roads? If it's not, change it so this can't happen. And penalize anyone paving railroads more than once.

by **fvwazing** » Sat Jun 30, 2012 12:41 pm

That is the parkinglot-discussion all over again. Yes, parkinglots can serve a purpose. Yes, parkinglots can be overdone. As can every aspect in Waze.

by **richardjeeves** » Sat Jun 30, 2012 12:59 pm

Over here in the uk some editors have started converting railways/railroads using the 'street to river' extension to change the lines to landmarks. I have done some railways/railroads in my area. I am going to leave them as landmarks for a few months, and see if that stops the problems. Ok so far.

by **fvwazing** » Sat Jun 30, 2012 1:59 pm

We are trying that in some regions too. In my view, it is too much hassle for a meager result - the tracks just don't look so good in every zoomlevel. Walkingtrails, on the other hand disappear when zoomed out, so it is undecided. Best solution would be ofcourse that Waze decided to show those railroads, as a thin black line or even +++++++++++... How hard is that?

by **jasonh300** » Sat Jun 30, 2012 3:00 pm

mapcat wrote:Also, if they're mapped already, why wouldn't paving be suppressed, like it is on existing roads? If it's not, change it so this can't happen. And penalize anyone paving railroads more than once.

They are until there's a slight deviation in the GPS signal and then you get little short red lines just off the track. Just like when someone drives on the interstate with paving on.

by **mapcat** » Sat Jun 30, 2012 5:15 pm

jasonh300 wrote:
mapcat wrote:Also, if they're mapped already, why wouldn't paving be suppressed, like it is on existing roads? If it's not, change it so this can't happen. And penalize anyone paving railroads more than once.

They are until there's a slight deviation in the GPS signal and then you get little short red lines just off the track. Just like when someone drives on the interstate with paving on.

Of course. I was questioning this:

fvwazing wrote:Because railroads are invisible in the client we still see traces of paving during trainrides.

by **fvwazing** » Sat Jun 30, 2012 5:29 pm

It's psychological... People in trains don't start paving if there is something called "Railroad" visible, that's all. There is no technical constraint that I am aware of.