It looks very amateurish if the maps show all town names including the province.
If you need to know that Markham is in Ontario, Waze is the last thing you need 
Sent from my Nexus 4 using Tapatalk 2
Maybe because there are more than one towns/cities of the same name in different provinces? I don’t know, I’m just guessing. I know some states have more than one town/city of the same names in them, so that would make sense. I’m just offering a perspective.
Because Waze cannot have several towns (City) with the same name far apart. This creates what we call a smudge where that town or city covers a massive area, hence the reason why we’ve had to do the same here in the UK.
Rest assured it’s not a problem unique to Canada and I’m sure you guys there have had to make do like we have.
Not that it’s not annoying mind you…
Sent from my GT-I9100 using Tapatalk 2
it’s right up there with “Unknown” in the amateurish display of municipality names in Waze.
I would’ve thought a navigation app would tend to mimic the appearance of a paper map. None other of which include the province name with the town name.
Do the Waze developers not use their own app?
Sent from my Nexus 4 using Tapatalk 2
But storing names in a database, without another field for municipality, state, county or whatever, there will be duplicates.
Duplicate names in a database means it’s the same thing so adding a bit on the end to make them NOT the same does make sense from a digital and database point of view.
It’s certainly not a pretty solution but as above, it is purely a workaround until we all get another field we so desperately need.
Not sure what you mean by app. The only thing they would do is edit the map but we do that. All other stuff is basically development of the client app and server backend, and if course fundraising, marketing, PR, etc.
Edit: I get it now…“surely they must use the app to know how ugly that looks”. I certainly hope so but they seem to want to add features rather than fix issues we’ve all reported worldwide. Keeps more backing and money coming in probably, showing that they’re moving forward.
Sent from my GT-I9100 using Tapatalk 2
In a database, records are identified with a unique ID (called a primary key). This primary key is unique, the record it’s associated with need not be. For example, this is what allows a hospital to keep records on multiple patients named “John Doe” without having to identify them as “John Doe from Town #1” and “John Doe from Town #2”.
I’m sure that most, if not all, Waze staff members probably use the Waze app while driving. However, since none of them (as far as I know) live in Canada, they don’t see the mess that this kludged-up but necessary workaround creates. If they did, perhaps they would be more motivated to work on enabling provinces in the Canada portion of the NA server. :roll:
You keep insisting this is a necessary workaround. What makes you think that? If it is necessary, then the Waze developers need some lessons in database 101.
It is necessary because we do not have access to the unique key for the database entries – all we have to work with is what you see on the WME screen. When you assign the city name field to a name that is already in use for that country/state, WME assumes that you want that segment to be in the existing city (and returns an error if the segment is located too far from the other segments in that city). The proper thing to do would be to define the province field for all “Canada” segments – but since Waze has not done so (yet), the workaround is necessary.
I would recommend, however, that the province name ONLY be added to the smaller & more obscure uses of the town name. That way, once Waze finally does add the province field definitions, it will be much easier and faster to change the city name on the smaller town to remove the province name from that field.
As per the wiki http://www.waze.com/wiki/index.php/Canada
Hypersky is right. We shouldn’t be using the provinces except as disambiguation. I.e., we can’t have two Kitchener places that are very separate… But there’s one in BC and one in ON. Same with Maple Ridge.
So… Use sparingly and only when you get save errors about being too far from the named city.
If Garmin and others can handle this scenario properly then the problem is with Waze and needs to be fixed!
So what if there are multiple towns with the same name. If the user is doing a search, show them all sorted by distance from current location.
Sent from my Nexus 4 using Tapatalk 2
It’s not as much about search (if you’ve tried searching in waze, especially in Canada, you’d know how ridiculously broken that function is).
It’s about unique identifiers. The devs are gradually adding features to move this in the right direction – one I have run into recently is that roads that already have a city name are now “too far away from the named city” and refuse to save the change of the road name.
We’re also working to eliminate smudges – areas where you’ll find misspellings of areas, or some variation including (or not) the province abbreviation. The following all existed until a week or two ago:
Vacouver
Vancouver
Vancouver, BC
Vancouver, British Columbia
Va
– we’re down to just “Vancouver” and “Vancouver, BC”… and working towards eradicating the “, BC” edition.
If you have similar issues, please send me specifics and I’d be happy to see what I can do about “desmudging” the area.
Regards,
-kb
Virtually every city in Ontario has a “City, Ontario”, “City of City”, “City” variant.
And… we have provinces now!
Just noticed today that WME is allowing us to set the province, just like you can set the state in the US.
Oh wow. That’s actually super exciting haha.
Sent from my GT-I9100 using Tapatalk 2
Well, it seems we matter to Waze! :')
Well I’ll only make that claim once we get gas station support. I wonder how short we are of the 70 percent threshold.
Sent from my GT-I9100 using Tapatalk 2
More than that, I wonder how they determine the 70% – you can find any list of gas stations and I can virtually guarantee 10-20% are closed for business…