Do you have a permalink to this? Separate signs is often a sign (pun not intended ) that the first segment should be unnamed and the second group of segments' names allowed to carry through to the first as well.
Most of the time, an exit will have only one sign, which may have a number of shields and cities. The rule for multiple signs in one instruction was drafted to parallel the behavior of one sign in one instruction. Consistency is important for those users who navigate by either highway numbers or city names—they'll expect to hear those parts in the same place each time.
I understand where you're coming from, though. I'd like to see this specific junction to assess whether leaving the first segment unnamed is a potential solution. I prefer to use it wherever practicable when there are two or more signs for the same exit, especially where those signs might give you a head start on knowing the better lane to be in.
Most of the time, an exit will have only one sign, which may have a number of shields and cities. The rule for multiple signs in one instruction was drafted to parallel the behavior of one sign in one instruction. Consistency is important for those users who navigate by either highway numbers or city names—they'll expect to hear those parts in the same place each time.
I understand where you're coming from, though. I'd like to see this specific junction to assess whether leaving the first segment unnamed is a potential solution. I prefer to use it wherever practicable when there are two or more signs for the same exit, especially where those signs might give you a head start on knowing the better lane to be in.
Re: Test of Text-to-Speech (TTS) Abbreviations in Waze Clien