It’s shorter than “City of London (London)”!
Actually, does it have its own local areas? Perhaps we ought to start a recursive discussion about whether to replace COL with its components?
Arrrrggggghhhhh!
David using Tapatalk
So, parliament sq Westminster. CoL is probably better. It’s barely bigger than Westminster anyway.
Sent from my GT-I9100P using Tapatalk 2
You do know I was messing with you, don’t you?!
I’m supposed to be in Wales by 3pm with 3 children. I really shouldn’t be wasting time winding up my seniors! :twisted:
Hehe 
Sent from my GT-I9100P using Tapatalk 2
Your seniors!
David using Tapatalk
In experience! Not necessarily age. :lol:
Good luck with that. My experience in the Brecon Beacons is the map’s rubbish*, and you don’t get any mobile coverage so you can’t report errors.
I’m really not looking forward to Pembrokeshire tomorrow!
*(No, of course the map isn’t really rubbish. Some folk have done some great work there. But it’s not perfect yet, and without the ability to report errors it’s difficult to put the finishing touches.)
It looks pretty bad where I am now. Anyway I may not get much done now. I just wrote off my car and am stranded at a holiday village 2 miles from the nearest town with 3 kids, no transport, no way back home to London (if it hasn’t been deleted in the next 2 weeks) and Aviva saying " we’ll send you a cheque" - to a chalet with no letterbox or street name!
Iain - that’s awful, hope you get it all sorted soon. Any chance of doing some editing while you’re waiting?
Thanks David. I actually did some last night to try and relax after dealing with the insurance. 
Mind you it’s not that easy. My phone has no data connection at all. My only connection is a 3 dongle plugged into a wireless access point perched on top of a cupboard near a window - and 9% signal is GOOD around here! I can’t tell if the glacial speed is down to my connection of the intl servers.
Still on the plus side, I haven’t got much else to do now. :?
That’s disgusting! They have a duty of care to get you home. Keep all receipts and send copies to Aviva in a cleverly worded letter.
Sent from my GT-I9100P using Tapatalk 2
They fulfilled their duty of care by returning us to “a safe place” - in this case, the holiday chalet where we’re staying. I shouldn’t be surprised. As a despatch rider for several years I had plenty of dealings with insurance companies. They never do one damn thing they don’t have to and you never get what you want from them! Now I’m waiting for them to tell me how much they’ll give me for my car.
Thanks for your thoughts guys. Right now my ex-wife is trying to buy a car in London to drive up to me (she was going to visit at the weekend with her husband anyway). If that works out I should be mobile again by the end of the week.
And I’m sorry for taking you off-topic when there are important Waze issues to discuss! 
Reminds me of the time a lorry hit mum’s car, took us even further from home to Ashford and had to plead with the local police station to give us a warrant for the train back home. Bastards!
Sent from my GT-I9100P using Tapatalk 2
Hope it’s all sorting out Iain.
back on topic:
I think we’re all agreed on removing any City called merely London. Shall I request support to do this?
How do people feel about the above suggestion of only adding city to segments of “significant” roads around the centre of a locality so that the city name label will appear on the client in the correct place. I’ve put “significant” as we have a choice of which roads to label. I like the simplicity of the approach but I see one downside - traffic reports may get the form “heavy traffic between X and Y”. Also less enlightened individuals (who don’t read the Wiki) may start repopulating the city field.
Any further thoughts?
Just to be clear…
Blank city field on all streets except major/minor highways, and primary streets? Or just highways?
I’m sure there will be instances where it helps to have the locality named on even lesser highways, particularly where there are similar road names in adjacent localities.
We’re forever getting stuff (including pizzas and Chinese take-aways!) delivered to Woodvale Avenue (S Norwood) which should have gone to Woodfield Avenue (Thornton Heath), or to Woodside Avenue (technically also S Norwood but Woodside is the local tramstop so could be used). So I’d certainly like to keep the City field populated on those examples.
The city field isn’t used for address searching, so it won’t help with duplicate road names.
Naming only main roads would make cities easier to set up, but I don’t think we should worry about editors naming minor streets too (as long as they’re correct).
Oh, and I actually prefer ‘traffic between X and Y’ as it tells you the direction too. Other traffic reports don’t.
via mobile
Was going to ask you about the searching point - thanks.
My recent experience with other editors suggest you’re too optimistic!
While I like the “between” reports they often seem to go off the screen for me.
Once the (London) suffix is gone, maybe they’ll fit better?
We’ll see!