I agree.
Thanks everyone for helping. The only part I’m confused on is do I create one point for the general rental car area AND the individual rental companies or do I just create the individual car companies (assuming more than 4 companies)? Thank you.
For a single rental car facility, always create a place for that facility. Then, if there are more than three or four companies, also create a point for each company with appropriate names and Google external links. If there are fewer than three or four (depending on whether one of the four spaces is needed for a Google external link to the rental car facility itself), then add alt names and external links as appropriate for each company in there, and also probably something to the description.
Although for simplicity’s sake it may be best to simply include a separate place for each company regardless of how many there are.
Differentiated terminal section updated.
I’m working on a mock up of this section now with all the different entries.
I’m confirming that in a unified rental car facility we want to have a single entry for the “MSY Rental Car Return” and then (when more than 4 agencies) add a PP for each individual as “Hertz - MSY”.
Are we placing the individual PPs at the respective rental car return entrance? That makes sense to me since that is the only destination you need for that company. If true, should the PP be labeled “Hertz car return - MSY” instead ?
I don’t think so, I mean, it will depend on the configuration of the facility at any rate. Sometimes different companies have different return entrances. However, the place really represents the business itself, with phone numbers and such, and you might still navigate there even if you are not returning a car (e.g., you need to rent a van for a weekend and the airport is the only game in town/nearest to you/cheaper than the neighborhood rental spot)—even if you won’t actually drive into there in your personal car, you might still navigate there and fend for yourself in the last mile (or use the Waze parking feature!). Navigating to a Hertz instead of the rental car facility or airport itself might give you a better clue as to where to walk once you here there, especially now that we can set point place stop points in WME (and double-especially once the client can display both stop point and place location).
Good points.
Therefore, the documentation should have you check if the individual facility has a separate car return from the front entrance with the counter.
- If the same, create one PP labeled: “Hertz - MSY”
- If separate, create two PPs labeled: “Hertz counter - MSY” and “Hertz car return - MSY”
I’m thinking “Hertz counter” would make the most sense to me, but maybe others think it should be different.
I would think “Hertz rental - MSY” and “Hertz car return - MSY”
The Hertz rental is where you go to rent and the car return to return.
Possibly for continuity either Hertz vehicle or car rental and return.
TC317, I am not sure I am following your proposal. When I read it I can see three different possibilities. Maybe you can compare with what I have here if similar.
At first I liked this “rental” term better than my own. However, when I write it out as I think we should be for consistency, the phrase is too visually similar in my mind to not get misread.
“Hertz car rental - MSY”
“Hertz car return - MSY”
May I propose we adjust to:
Split PP locations
“Hertz rental counter - MSY”
“Hertz vehicle return - MSY”
Single PP location
“Hertz rental - MSY”
I also think this is less ambiguous since in the original example “Hertz car rental - MSY” does not exclude the vehicle return if you don’t notice the separate vehicle return entry.
Now with split locations we are being specific to the activity at that location and with single PP locations it is all encompassing.
Not crazy about this, I would prefer the following:
“Hertz – MSY” either for the one and only or for the counter if separate; and
“Hertz car return – MSY” for the return, tracking the generic “Rental Car Return” language.
If I am alone on thinking that the dichotomy between “Hertz” and “Hertz car return” is not clear enough in a search for “hertz”, then I would prefer “Hertz counter” for the former (i.e., your original proposal).
I’m a fan of Hertz - MSY for a single location. No need to write more than that. If two locations I like Hertz rental counter - MSY and Hertz car return - MSY.
Sent from my LG-H811 using Tapatalk
Yes, I agree with what you wrote, and that was what I intended to say. I would like to blame my ambiguous response on all of the wonderful pharmaceuticals running through my body right now (I had bilateral TMJ replacement on Monday). The last several days have been challenging.
At least that sounds good! :lol:
I can see it simplified like this too. IMO, I think the differentiation between the return and counter locations can be very helpful for the separated facilities.
OK. This baby got pretty complex to follow in the text, so I summarized it in a table.
Please review the table itself to ensure you agree with the different criteria.
Then, separately note your feelings about word selection and provide that feedback as well.
I know there was two camps on naming the rental counter uniquely from a single, combined location vs. the same as a single, combined location. I think we had a pretty even split on that, so we should request some more input to reach a consensus.
Where did we get “IAD - Rental car” for a single location?
Here’s what I would change:
- Single location, <3-4: “IAD - Rental Car Return” (preferred) or “IAD - Rental Car Facility” (alternate) (same for SFO example line 1)
- Separate locations* Rental counter:* General: “KAE - Rental Car Counter” or “KAE - Rental Car Facility” (on the fence) (same for DEN example line 1)
- Each: “Avis – DEN” et al., “Hertz – JFK” et al.* Car return:* General: “KAE - Rental Car Return” (same for DEN example line 1)
- Each: “Avis car return – DEN” et al., “Hertz car return – JFK” et al.
Regarding “Rental Car Counter”, “Rental Car Facility”, “Rental Car Return” – first, I think it important that all such terms start with the words “rental car”. Second, in this capacity it is used as a name, therefore as a proper noun—compare “Long Term Parking”.
Single Location: I’m good with expanding the single location names, but my preference would be to go with “IAD - Rental car facility” and as a secondary option “IAD - Rental car return.” To me, seeing an entry for rental car return implies there is a location for other rental car functions like the rental car counter.
Separate Locations: I’m good with all these expanded names. I personally thought I heard a preference to have shorter names, but maybe I misread the replies.
Rental car nnnnnn: I’m good with the expanded naming as noted.
Capitalization: From my investigations in this area, these are all common nouns or adjectives of common nouns. While you can say that any “counter” is common, you cannot say that a “rental counter” is a proper noun or somehow unique. I would compare it to saying:
- California’s largest mountain is Mount Whitney.
- The largest California mountain.
In the first entry, we capitalize “Mount” because it is part of the proper name.
In the second entry, even though we are clearly speaking of one specific mountain and everyone knows it would be Whitney, we don’t capitalize the word “mountain” in that context.
For the example “Hertz rental car counter” and “Hertz rental car return” both of these places are not unique in the world. We would not say “Pick me up at the Downtown Bus Stop.”
Compare these related examples. If you list a person’s title, you only capitalize the portion that is part of their name, but not if you list it after their name.
- Director Henry Platt
- Henry Platt, director of public relations.
Having said that, if you had a placard on a desk or a sign on the street, you would capitalize “Director of Public Relations.” Also, we know that any rental car return sign is likely to be capitalized, so should we match the sign visible to drivers with our displayed text like we do with everything else?
Here is something that you might want to consider adding.
Chicago Midway International Airport (MDW) has the different Arrival and Departure Terminals. BUT the difference is there is not one common road that accesses them. Basically three ways in and each splits so a common pin location is not adequate. (Found this out the hard way when sister had a first out flight after a funeral)
Even coming in from the two main ways - northbound and southbound Cicero Ave - the split is at the ramps and never common.
Yes I understand this is not the common experience but probably one of the harder ones to map correctly.
I am okay with “Rental Car Facility” as the primary name and “Rental Car Return” as an alt name for a single facility.
Not proper nouns, right, generally anyway—I mischaracterized the issue in my post. What we’re really looking at is Title Case. I don’t think there is any place we don’t use Title Case in place names outside of parentheticals and the occasional purely-informational appendage, e.g., “Rest Area (no toilet) - I-10 W mile 425”. “Rest Area” isn’t a proper noun, but we use title case for the main place name.
We do the same with parking lots… not that I necessarily agree with some applications of that, but it’s what we do at this point.
Cool.
For the wiki table, to keep it clean, I think the alt name is best addressed as a footnote reference rather than try to cram it into the individual cells. I’ll update the proposal to show what I mean.
Ah, yes, Title Case. This would be in line with my final counter comment for a placard on a desk or sign above the entrance of the facility. As long as we are consistent I can support that.