I guess that would be very helpful to remove the direction options for a non drivable road and set it directly to unknow, or not-available, as they are, as the name says, non drivable.
In that case makes no sense to have the option (and the risk) to choose directions, and create nodes with posible allowed/not allowed turns if the road is definitelly, non-drivable.
If is a restricted road, for autoriced vehicules or whatever should not be identified as non-drivable.
A change in the color for those non-drivables roads will also help to identify them as what they are.
Unknown has (or very little) effect on whether routing happens on a segment, whether it is driveable or not. Just FYI. There are, however, definitely locations where a 1-way bike path is required, for example. At least, where they are posted as such.
No, they should be included, especially due to situations where a walking path is named, the address for a residence uses the name of the walking path (not the street), and that walking path is the only way to be directed to/find the residence.
Because of that, and because in the future Waze may give more than driving directions (pedestrian/bike), there is no reason to remove directionality from non-driveable segments.
thank you for your answers, but I still have some doubts.
If we connect a non-drivable road to a street and the non-drivable road has directions it will generate automatically turning instructions to the street that should not exists, as never should a car go trought that road. so, in order to avoid misconfusing, no turning arrows should be created in those king of nodes, I guess
I agree it is confusing. And having that Map Problem type could lead to issues. However, this situation is fairly rare, with walking paths being the only way to arrive at the destination, so I doubt this will get a lot of attention from the developers.