I’m wondering whether this would be a good time to modify the wiki to make it clear that the road name that should be listed is the one that shows on the BGS, not some decision based on what the exit ramp connects to. For some reason the page doesn’t seem to contemplate that exits without numbers may include control cities as well. My understanding is that we are saying that the exit ramps without exit numbers should be formatted the same as entrance ramps.
Thus:
If the exit sign shows a number as well as a street or highway name, the exit ramp should be named “Exit 7: SR-27 / Bowie” to match a sign like this:
If the exit is not numbered, the exit ramp should be named “to I-75 S / Lexington” to match signs like this:
:?:
I’m intending to cover exits which have a BGS. Are there exits as we are defining them (i.e. ramps that are part of a grade seperated interchange) that do not have BGSs?
I can’t say for certain that there are, but I figured it can’t hurt to cover it if you’re redoing the guideline anyways. I’m sure there’s a few somewhere. And that may be a valid use for naming the ramp based on where it leads
If you have an exit where the local convention uses the street name when providing verbal exits, would it be OK to list the street first instead of last? For example, no one in Green Bay would say to take the Highway 54 exit, we would just tell someone to take the Mason St exit.
Wow, I just checked out Mason and I didn’t know it had double roundabouts. :shock: :shock:
Since Mason St is also contains, what I think is, County Route 32 and 54, the exit may have to include them. However, it seems that, by the design of the BGS, the main name of that road is Mason St. but is also known as 32 and 54. So I guess you could make the exit Mason St and ensure that the proper sections of Mason have alt names of the 32 and 54.
No. We follow the order things are on the BGS because it’s simple, uniform, easy to edit, and doesn’t require any arbitrary decisionmaking. Even if no one knows or cares that Claiborne Ave is LA-39, the sign has the LA-39 shield first, so we say it first.
(I will note the one exception you spoke of recently in the JSG thread, which I am a fan of and have used myself – moving anything prefaced with “TO” on the actual sign to the end of the string.)
They’re State Highways, but yes. Moot point anyway based on sketch’s reply.
WisDOT now has about a 5yr love affair with roundabouts. The entire US-41 corridor from south of Oshkosh to the north end of the Green Bay Metro area has been getting roundabouts along with the Interstate standard upgrades for when I-57 is extended from Chicago to GB (via Milwaukee). If you like Mason, check this one out - I have 2 more of these that were made by lvl1 editors to KISS.
But, to his point, if the BGS doesn’t already include too much verbiage, it might be OK to add “/ local name.” I don’t see much downside, so long as it doesn’t result in CONFLICT with the BGS, reads the BGS FIRST, and is based on LOCAL KNOWLEDGE that the exit is called something else locally. I do see an upside in case the driver has received some sort of instructions from a local but is using Waze as a failsafe, and could otherwise become confused/concerned at the mismatch.
If the BGS is already long, then I would avoid the addition.
Yeah, I do agree with that. Adding an unsigned but known local name is fine if it wouldn’t result in a too-long TTS string. But if the names are already both there, there’s no reason to reverse their order.
Anyway, back to what CBenson said – agreed, a heavily revised section on naming following BGSes is warranted. It should be more explicit and more detailed, and it should also cover onramps (“to I-75 S / Lexington” could easily be either an onramp or an unnumbered exit; indeed, what’s the difference?).
It shall be as the guidance has always been – to follow the BGS in a uniform order: left to right, top to bottom. So, shields first across the top, then the text below (road names and/or control cities), in that order.
Also, uniformity should be emphasized: shields first, then control cities, even if they’re on separate signs, and even if the control city sign is seen first as you drive.
Another section on what to do when “TO” is on the actual shield/sign (put it at the end along with any associated control cities) is in a different form on a revision of the wayfinder page currently being undertaken by PesachZ and myself.
