Quick Overview (more details below)
We are very excited to share we’ve opened the new WME Ruler feature and Virtual node handles for Area Places, Map comments and Restricted Areas with this release, and hope they help to make your editing experience more comfortable. Community suggestions:
- WME ruler: we are glad to announce that we opened the WME Ruler feature in this release (120 votes).
Virtual node handlers for Area Places, Map comments, Restricted Areas (45 votes).
EDIT: We are very excited to also announce the release of the first phase of WME Compact Mode!
This new capability was born due to your feedback and as requested by many of you, as it reduces padding on the left side panel. We expect to continue improving WME Compact mode by adding other requested capabilities.
Bug Fixes:
Events: Can not save “city” in the location directlyю
Time based restrictions impossible to set on Junction Boxed paths.
Segments: Wrong segment update status if road closures tab previously selected. New features/enhancements:
Introduced a design refresh for the Delete Segment tooltip.
We added a tooltip to explain why convert to public/ residential are not available.
Design changes added to the Drives popup.
Area tooltip in the header menu: design updates for the “Restricted Driving Areas” tooltip and the “Enable layer” button.
As soon as a scrollbar is needed, the width of the sidebar is too narrow. For me, that’s the case at 4 or more lines in the Map Comment (in full screen).
Chrome Version 106.0.5249.119
All scripts disabled
I too am seeing the side panel width affecting scripts, including URMP and URC-E. Without these scripts working URs is much more difficult, to the point where I won’t contribute to that anymore. Please consider reverting this change.
This sums it up quite adequately. I don’t know any proficient editors who don’t use at least the UR-MP-script to work URs. This brings up the question of why anyone would want to roll out any new WME version, totally wrecking that functionality. I know you can’t check compatibility with every script out there, but can’t you at least be aware of the most widely used ones?
The net effect will be detrimental to the map’s accuracy, as less UR and MP will be addressed promptly. If you keep this up, editors will take a break from WME or eventually give up altogether. As it is, we’re finding it hard enough to keep editors motivated, never mind recruiting new ones (who a.t.m. can’t edit at all at Level 1).
Please fix this. Please try harder not to break what you are trying to build.
Was this mentioned during beta testing to the script author? It is my understanding that the script author is not very active at the moment. I don’t use UR-MP much, but I tested it in beta and saw the same issue.
Waze is not obligated to avoid interference with scripts. Nor should they be.
Demanding version rollback is not the way. Calmly inform the script author of the change and be patient. The map is not going to fall apart in the days it takes script authors to catch up.
As jm6087 alluded to, none of this should be a shock to anyone who has WME Beta access. Many script authors have decided to wait until changes hit production before adjusting their scripts to accommodate. Be patient with them. They are providing a valuable service to you at no cost. None of us is entitled to instant gratification.
If you are somehow completely incapable of addressing URs without scripts, take a break from URs and do something else. And maybe take a breath and think about whether you’re confusing “impossible” for “less convenient”.
The current work around for UR-MP tracking is to change the width in line 3361 css += “.urt-table { border: 2px solid #3d3d3d; width: 100%; }”; to css += “.urt-table { border: 2px solid #3d3d3d; width: 85%; }”;
I also think that calls for a rollback aren’t the way, although I can understand the frustration.
Of course Waze is not obligated to consider user scripts when updating WME, but those scripts exist for a simple reason. To make WME better, more efficient, less annoying and because there are no built in features addressing a lot of those issues.
The fact that we ‘need’ scripts to efficiently manage and process URs baffles me. That’s were community engagement happens. URs and the editors processing them are essentially what makes Waze the crowd-sourced app it is. And the tool behind that is the Feed? Does it work? Sure. Is it efficient? Nope. It’s as basic as it gets.
For me it’s not about ‘you broke a script that someone else wrote’, it’s about 'can we please already get a built in solution for managing URs’
You are absolutely correct. Yet, where would Waze be if we all did only what we were obligated to do? After all, nobody in the community is obligated to edit the Waze map. My point was (and is) that this kind of issue is highly frustrating for editors, who help make Waze what it is by donating their time and effort. I think Waze shouldn’t aim at frustrating them, but rather at helping and motivating them. But you’re right, they’re not obligated to do that. They have every right to shoot themselves in the foot over and over again. I would, however, advise against it.
Keeping the exact same interface in perpetuity as design standards evolve is also shooting themselves in the foot. If you don’t show new editors a friendly and pleasant interface, you won’t get or keep new editors, and without new editors, eventually, Waze will die.
Veteran editors are not the only stakeholders here.
Today’s complaints are particularly ironic because the issue many are complaining about is caused by Waze listening to our feedback and making the side panel narrower to show more map. Y’all…
Waze will not rollback a release simply for script(s) incompatibility. They never have, never will. They might rollback for a function that is detrimental to the ecosystem. Which has happened on a handful of occasions.
Sketch said it best. I am with him 100%. One thing you have to remember, Waze staff developers DO NOT use scripts. They do not know what scripts do. They develop based on a vanilla WME with which they have 100% control over.
Waze Staff has been trying to get the community to tell them which scripts are most important so they can look at incorporating the most important features from within those scripts into native WME. The last poll they did on that, URC-E and UR-MP were at the almost bottom of the list. Either the power users of those scripts never said anything / voted on anything, OR, the features of the other scripts were FAR MORE important. I can think of a couple that are: Junction Angle Info and True Segment Length.
That being said… I will get to the update to URC-E when I get to it. I don’t know when it will be done, but I have started working on it. Honestly, I would start to ween off of scripts if you can. The way the Waze development is heading as a whole is going to make it harder and harder for scripts to interact with the native code. As it has been stated on several occasions: WME was never meant to be an API. Scripts are not that important to the staff. They are throwing us a bone by at least asking for input and giving us heads up on changes. But that’s about as far as it goes.
Be careful updating local copies of scripts! The way Tampermonkey updates work, changes you make locally have a hard time being overwritten by the official release. I see it happen all the time.
I find the comment about script writers providing a valuable service to us at no cost an interesting one. Absolutely agreed and they are much appreciated!
However, consider how many thousands of editors there are who are providing free labor for Waze. In sum, Waze benefits far more from the many volunteers than we do from Waze.
Waze staff are well aware of what scripts are popular, have admitted to using them for their own editing, and Waze has started incorporating some small pieces of popular script functionality into WME. (For instance, the Beta has nice filtering of issues (if a bit awkward to select) that works much better than the usual scripts in that it displays all the URs it should.)
So I do not think it is unreasonable for Waze to take into consideration the effects these sorts of changes do have on their most valuable resource, namely the volunteer editors.
