Junction style guide: ramp restriction inconsistency

[jhfrontz]

We've been discussing the need for straight-through prohibition for off-to-on ramps at intersections over here.

The junction style guide page mentions that there is a ramp transition penalty.

The limited access interchange style guide page says that there is a need to put a straight-through prohibition on to "prevent the routing server from trying to route someone off the freeway just to get back on it".

Is there really ever a case that the routing goes off and back on without something else causing it (slow average speed on the freeway vs. ramp, client "prefer shorter distance over time", hidden/latent restrictions, etc.)? If there's a penalty, then (all other things considered), why would it ever route straight through?

At the very least, there needs to be some consistency between these two pages.

[CBenson]

I don't see the conflict. My understanding is that conditions like the slow speed on the freeway is what causes off/on routing over ramps. Many consider this to be bad routing even if faster, thus the straight-through prohibition.

[kentsmith9]

I don't see the conflict. My understanding is that conditions like the slow speed on the freeway is what causes off/on routing over ramps. Many consider this to be bad routing even if faster, thus the straight-through prohibition.

I agree.

[jasonh300]

This is where the problem usually comes in....if there's an accident on an overpass, Waze *could* try to route traffic off a ramp and then back on, however, Waze *shouldn't* ever make this suggestion, as it may or may not be illegal. If it's a situation where the highway is closed and there's no other options, we have to rely on the common sense of the driver to follow the instructions of the police directing traffic, or all of the other cars making the bypass.

If we don't make these restrictions, something else will inevitably get screwed up causing this type of routing and we're going to have to fix it anyway.

[Kuhlkatz]

Even though through routing can be done safely on most ramps, road markings almost always indicates that a straight through drive is not an option.
Even with no other signage explicitly prohibiting a straight through drive, my guess would be that this is illegal in most places.

[BlazeTool]

In cases where it is legal to go straight, wouldn't this cause Problem Reports whenever someone does go straight? While seemingly pointless to do so, I have no doubt it happens.

[BlazeTool]

Even with no other signage explicitly prohibiting a straight through drive, my guess would be that this is illegal in most places.

At the intersection that started the discussion, the signage in place explicitly lists that you can go straight.

[bz2012]

Whether or not it is legal, I see a LOT of driver complaints about bad driving instructions and bad junctions when they get routed off the highway and then back on.
Especially when they followed the instructions, but even when they didn't.

I have tried adding a bunch of nodes along the ramps to 'try and stop the off/on routing' in some places in the middle of no where. In the case I am thinking of, I could NOT forbid the traffic because there was also an access road that went through the same intersections.

In any case, the added nodes did NOT stop the driver complaints. GPS tracks and routes still showed WAZE trying to route them off/on.

My e-mail to support on this subject has never been answered.

[AndyPoms]

My e-mail to support on this subject has never been answered.

Check your ISP's spam filters... you are looking for "Waze Support" <inbox@my.nanorep.com>...

[jasonh300]

To answer BlazeTool's question, yes, it may generate a problem report if someone actually goes straight, but no more than frequently violated illegal turns.

When the road crossing the freeway is split, I do the crossed exits trick, which prevents off-and-on routing and eliminates the need to restrict any turns.

https://www.waze.com/editor/?zoom=7&lat ... TTTFTTTTFT