I’ve noticed lately some editors around the country are putting destinations (main towns, cities) onto the ends of names for freeway ramps, slip lanes and the like.
The wiki currently does not suggest to do this and on a personal note, I don’t add destinations and I don’t think they are vital for navigation, but i’m curious to know what others think about this. Do we need to make it clearer to editors that this is not something they should be doing?
You could take this as it allows the addition of cites or towns.
The problem is, we are thinking as locals when we are naming things and take it for granted we know where we are going.
We do not consider the drivers who are visiting either domestically or internationally. I think when you are a visitor you would be navigating to a town or city and it would help to have both the road name and destination, especially if they are shown on the signs.
I know you would have fun over here in WA, as the vast majority of our exits only have the name of the road you will exit to. So trying to make sure you are going to the correct place can be fun if you don’t get the right exit.
And when you are in unfamiliar territory, using a voice with spoken street names, the addition of the destination just helps that little bit extra when driving.
I think it can be useful. As long as we don’t end up with too large a list on any given ramp.
I wouldn’t make it a rule to add destinations but I wouldn’t discourage it either.
I think glomp has the rest covered.
I’ve thought more about this issue. Weighing up that destinations are useful in some circumstances while keeping in mind that the text can’t be too long or it could cause issues with the voice guidance, I propose the following:
If you guys agree with this, i’ll add it to the wiki page so others can follow these guidelines.
I agree with everything except for that last one about no destinations for regular road ramps. If I was a visitor I would definitely find it useful in some way.
I have no problems with the current way, which would be
I also disagree with removing the destination from exits, that’s the whole point of labeling them. If only the route number and road name was needed, then they could just be left unnamed and Waze would pick that up from the next named segment.
On long trips, I generally have an idea of what larger towns I’ll pass through along the way, but wouldn’t have a clue what the route numbers will be.
I understand about how the destinations would be useful on the offramps to normal roads. However unlike onramps, there is 2 destinations as opposed to one.
If it won’t feel like too much for the TTS to digest, then we can add them to normal offramps too.
I have been adding them to the ramps around my area of Brisbane after seeing them in a few different places. I think it is an excellent idea having the TTS say what is exactly on the sign, it makes it so obvious what exit you are supposed to take. Even with one that is too long for the two lines on the display it still is obvious from what you can see and definitely given it says what the sign has on it which exit to take.
To be honest I am not a fan of having the exit say join the <free/high-way> (N). The (N) part can be ambiguous and for those that are directionally challenged totally perplexing. I say it can be ambiguous because when I was doing the ramps along the Sturt and Hume Highways the road can be going in any compass direction depending on its location so sometimes it was saying “To Hume Hwy (N)” when that section was actually going South!
Edit: One last thing on the (N) topic, I don’t think I have ever seen this concept before either. Google maps, TomTom etc always just name the free/highway as it is without any attempt to sub-name it according to direction? Is this a Waze standard or Australia only?
Edit #2: The long exit names don’t seem to be an issue for the TTS. The longest I have near me is: “Exit to: SR32 - Milton Rd / City / Toowong / Ipswich” The TTS says it perfectly just Ipswich is cutoff on the display.
I believe the whole compass direction at the end of freeway names came about because about a year or 2 ago, the Waze app actually gave you pop up reports (you have to access them manually now as the app hasn’t done this for quite some time now) and there was no easy way to tell which carriageway the report was on. However in recent times, report pins on the maps now adjust to what side of the road you report on, so it’s easier to tell.
Haven’t thought about this in quite a while, but I believe that now with the changes Waze have made to the app over the past few updates, as well as now making editors put in destinations, I think compass directions could now be redundant.
I have been putting what is on the big green signs for the entry/exit ramps.
Sometimes they will have the highway/freeway name and direction on them, other times it is just the highway/freeway name and destination. And if the driver has missed some of the TTS prompt, the sign and the display in the client would match up so they know they are heading in the right direction.
The directionals are still on the sections of the highway/freeway name, if it is split and if appropriate to have the direction.
You’re right about there usually being 2, but in my opinion in might be better to put only one city. Once you match the number and city (name is usually missing in rural areas), most users should understand which exit to take.
One thing to consider with naming the ramps off a Freeway or M Highway is that Waze puts “Exit left onto” before any text, so if the ramp is named “Exit to ABC” then Waze says “Exit left onto Exit to ABC”. if the ramp is named “to ABC” Waze says “Exit left onto ABC”. (note that it ignores the ‘to’.)
So, exit ramps off to the left don’t need the “Exit” in front.
Exit ramps off to the right need it, as Waze prefaces the ramp name with “Keep right onto”
Yes I had considered the redundancy of the initial Exit to: but in my experience of listening to it, the initial words come so fast that I don’t notice any sources of confusion. If you put an extra “the” in there (eg. Exit left onto THE exit to ABC) then grammatically it would be correct. However, I am not suggesting that as a solution. I like the current way it works. I had assumed that the reason why the “Exit to: ABC” was written as it is is so that it reads well in the client. If you didn’t have that and the voice commands are not on then all you would see is “to ABC” as well as the graphical turn depiction which isn’t as obvious as the command of “Exit to”. Does that make sense?
I have set up an example at a straightforward diamond interchange in SE Melbourne to see how well the TTS and directions work. I have done some of the ramp segments in a certain way so when you take an offramp, depending on if the directions tell you to go left or right, you will only get given the name of the destination you are driving towards, reducing confusion.
https://www.waze.com/editor/?env=row&zoom=5&lat=-37.99804&lon=145.2751&layers=1157
Will have to wait until a tile update to give it a proper test.
I think that we have to keep the extra “exit to / exit ##” in the name primarily because of the numbered exits appearing on more and more freeways of late. Otherwise it would say “Exit to the left, onto 9 SR15 - Warrigul Rd” for example, which isn’t proper grammar.
What are those short segments without names just after the ramps are split to being left or right?
Because they are unnamed, the TTS will prompt with the next named segment. So if you were heading west on the Monash Fwy and exited towards Belgrave - Hallam Rd, you would get something similar to the following -
Exit left onto Exit 20: Belgrave - Hallam Rd
Keep right onto Belgrave - Hallam Rd towards Endeavour Hills
Turn right onto Belgrave - Hallam Rd
or
Exit left onto Exit 20: Belgrave - Hallam Rd
Keep left onto Belgrave - Hallam Rd towards Hallam
Turn left onto Belgrave - Hallam Rd
Andy is exactly right. It’s to avoid being told to turn left or right twice. You should get told to exit, then get told to turn left or right with the correct destination to head towards. I’ll wait for the next tile update, then give it some tests with routing and then determine if any tweaking is needed. If all seems to be well, i’ll start rolling out this style of ramp naming to other interchanges.
lakeyboy,
Once you guys have agreed on the proper ramp TTS naming format, let either Caradellino or myself (or whoever has editing access to the Australia Wiki pages) know so we can also update the Wiki for future editors.
No worries, i’ll post exactly what should be put in the wiki very soon. I’ve got it just about down pact.
Just another observation of the TTS. I think it does not say the leading “to” even when the street starts “Exit to”. As far as I can hear it is saying “Exit left onto Exit ABC” vice “Exit left onto Exit to ABC”
EDIT: I take it back it does say “to” but it says it so quickly you can only just make it out!