The main use case we try to provide for is when a user is navigating to town. If they search for "parking" (or a similar term), then they'll see nearby car park places where they can leave their car. Hence the emphasis on only mapping general purpose, public car parks, and making sure they are named

When navigating to a specific place that provides parking for its customers, then there should be adequate car park _roads_ at that place so that Waze can navigate the driver to that parking. Plus, the points you made above about snapping drivers to the parking instead of the main road.

^ yes, that is generally considered best practise in most countries

Sent from my Nexus 4 using Tapatalk

1. The preference in the UK (and I think elsewhere) is to keep PLRs unnamed (we don't use [P] any more). Our guidelines are in the UK forum...

2. The Global Guidelines for car parks are pretty extensive, and the 3 principles are a good starting point. Unnamed car parks are no use to anyone. We've been cleaning up our car parks this year...

https://wiki.waze.com/wiki/United_Kingd ... #Car_Parks
https://wiki.waze.com/wiki/Places/Parking_lot

Sent from my Nexus 4 using Tapatalk

davidg666 wrote:By POI would I be right in assuming you mean an area place?

Area or Point place, depends how big stuff is, that'll be my next forum question . (POI - point of interest)

I currently do like the UK system, it works well and does route correctly, having the PLRs un-nammed only reduces map clutter slightly and doesn't impact on identifying the destination as not alll roads are named in the client, especially in towns and cities. As for car parks now we have the ability to set conditions for area places then they really aren't needed. Using a PLR to name a place just seems rather redundant, dropping a POI with the correct name should really be all that is needed.