I did a search of the Wiki and found nothing on this setting.
I understand it is only accessible by Rank 4 and greater editors, but I don’t think we should have nothing in the Wiki for only that reason.
I propose I add a small section in the Creating and editing road segments page in the detailed sections near the bottom where we cover each feature when editing a segment.
I would preface that section to say it is only accessible by {{rank|preferred}} (4) editors and give no significant details on how it works beyond something saying it makes the segment act like a higher or lower functional class when determining routing, but due to the highly complex nature of routing, this one setting is hardly easy to predict how it will affect routing in all cases.
And the biggest thing is that as long as it is marked as Preferred, only Rank 4+ can manipulate the segment, no matter what the lock level of the segment.
I thought that any new segment could have the routing raised or lowered by any editor. Has this changed?
Btw this week I found several Map Comments with an editor (R1) asking to lower or raise some segments. Had no concept of how we select road types based on the wiki and the DOT’s functional classification tables.
So we have to be careful what we say or they might make a parallel road at their desired level (I did see this once about two years ago but was a red road and not connected to anything.
You are correct. I can edit all other aspects of the segment, i.e geo nodes, SL, disconnect/connect junction nodes, etc., but I am unable to change the road type or split the segment. I tried lowering a segment from mH to PS, but I was unable to save the changes.
Please let me know if you have any other questions.
I thought preference was editable by any editor for a new segment. At least it was before so it might have changed.
Edited to say just had checked. R3 and below don’t have the capability to change on a new segment.
Also see that ability is taken it away from all editors (at least R5 and below) until segment is saved. Then if R4 and above that -1/ unchanged / +1 for routing priority is available.
I think that we need some information about when to use.
I have a R1 that is posting map comments about this needs to be raised or this needs to be lowered. No understanding about Road Type selection based on the wiki and the State’s FC designations. Also just had a R4 PM me about a MH that went through a town at 25 mph and would cause unnecessary traffic. The MH was a US-## ALT which is either a FW or a MH. Since State’s FC was not expressway and it had at grade intersections it met all the MH criteria…
So because of the above I recommend:
We state that RC/SM concurrence should be obtained prior to upgrading or downgrading a road. This way there is some consistency
Give an example of when could be an appropriate time to change the routing.
ex. There is a limited access road that meets the Freeway criteria except there is a stretch where there are two at-grade intersections. The road type is selected to FW for all but the appropriate segments with the intersections. The routing preference is preferred so that all of the road is considered to be FW. This helps keep FW to match the Waze definition as to not confuse other editors but gives better routing.
Recommend that the lock level of roads that have preferred/unpreferred selected to be locked one level up to help identify them since often people don’t look at that attribute since it is very seldom used. But when you select a stretch of road and there are different lock levels for the same type, then it prompts the editor to go look and see what is up.
Have a generic section for the state wiki page to link to this section and to state that contact SMs/RCs prior to changing?
For consideration, Should we have lists of what is changed on preferred/unpreferred listed on the Statewikis?
Agreed with subs5, there should be some guidance on when (not) to use as well as simply an explanation of the feature. Agreed with his points 1–3 and possibly 4. Regarding 2, the most important use is for road type continuity, when for example a stretch of mH is explicitly used to get between a Freeway and a MH (evidenced by “TO” signs, e.g., an exit from an Interstate that says “TO US-131” but actually deposits you on a state highway that brings you to US-131 a mile or so away. That stretch of SR-whatever, assuming it’s mH, should be set to +1.
A few examples of what it won’t do might also be helpful. E.g., “Routing road type will not make the routing server more or less likely to use a particular road in short- or medium-distance routes.”
#4- Subs5, can you clarify what you are proposing in the State Wiki pages? Currently the pages focus on deviations from the standards in the overall Wiki, with a few exceptions where everyone wants to be clear editors follow the general guidance. Are you asking to add a sentence to tell readers that the state follows the guidelines for preferred and unpreferred routing?
Current we have the section opening
That section then is followed by the unique changes each state does.
Expanding on your idea, I think we need to amend that opening section to be more explicit that the state follows all of the general guidelines in the wiki with the exceptions noted “below” where each state lists their changes.
In that opening section for all states, we can add links to the key areas expanding on Road Names and Road Types. We could include other important areas like this preferred routing section. If this is what you meant, I can open the State Wiki thread with this proposal to keep that portion of the change in the appropriate thread.
Consideration (#5) - That sounds like am impossible task to maintain a list like that. I would not recommend we try to do that.
Yes for #4, that is what I mean for having on the generic State wiki page template.
I do not think there should be very many preferred or unpreferred routing locations. This would be maintained by a SM and I think would be good for examples of why used. Also for when SMs turnover there is some history.
Even in large states I can’t see hundreds of preferred and unpreferred routings.
In some cases there will be, for example using the Texas-style frontage road system for Interstate access, preference is used as part of SCR region guidance in setting up frontage roads that carry traffic between MH and FW via a ramp and a section of frontage road (the default type for frontage road is mH).
That said, as those are done in the presence of clear unambiguous guidance, they would not need to be listed on such a list.
