Landmark - Best Practices US

[ img ] This is the place to discuss issues that are relevant for locations in the US. For any other discussions, please use the main forums.

Moderator: MapSir

Re: Landmark - Best Practices US

Postby txemt » Mon Aug 05, 2013 9:41 pm

I've started getting URs for the San Antonio airport. When I plug it into the nav, it directs me to the front entrance, but people are going being routed to the back, lately and I don't know what's changed.
txemt
Area Manager
Area Manager
 
Posts: 4764
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2012 7:03 pm
Location: 26.1901 80.3659
Has thanked: 42 times
Been thanked: 1034 times

Re: Landmark - Best Practices US

Postby jasonh300 » Mon Aug 05, 2013 8:34 pm

The behavior about landmark routing is extremely uncertain. Your best bet is to reduce the existing landmark to just cover the terminal building. Leave the name as-is. Then draw a second landmark to cover the entire airport and don't name it. This should get the traffic going to the right place.
jasonh300
 
Posts: 7567
Joined: Fri Oct 28, 2011 4:26 pm
Location: New Orleans, LA, USA
Has thanked: 402 times
Been thanked: 978 times

Re: Landmark - Best Practices US

Postby HandofMadness » Mon Aug 05, 2013 8:04 pm

Let me know if this is the wrong thread for this. I believe there's another thread somewhere also discussing the best practices for landmarks in the US.

Here's the problem, landmark's entered into Waze do show up on the Waze tab search results (at least some of the time). Waze tries to route you to the middle of the landmark. This is causing problems at Bob Hope Airport in Burbank as it is the first result users see is the Waze tab.
viewtopic.php?f=251&t=53258 (Current discussion)

Now an obvious answer is to delete the private road servicing that one hanger (even through there are GPS tracks showing people are using it), but I think there's still a good chance that Waze will not be directing people to the terminals, but to a nearby closer road.

Is there anything that could or should be done in this case?
HandofMadness
Area Manager
Area Manager
 
Posts: 1802
Joined: Mon Apr 16, 2012 7:44 am
Location: Californialand, USA
Has thanked: 18 times
Been thanked: 375 times

Re: Landmark - Best Practices US

Postby vectorspace » Thu Jun 13, 2013 4:42 am

Agreed. Using landmarks as POIs seems like a temporary fix, but probably worth it at a limited number of heavily-traveled locations, like airports. One can place these "landmark-POIs" within landmarks, or completely delete the larger landmark causing an issue with routing.
vectorspace
 
Posts: 1183
Joined: Sat Dec 17, 2011 7:05 pm
Location: Albuquerque, NM, USA
Has thanked: 173 times
Been thanked: 420 times

Re: Landmark - Best Practices US

Postby AndyPoms » Wed Jun 12, 2013 11:04 pm

vectorspace wrote:What I heard, very resoundingly clear from Ehud, was that he wanted more content. He probably wanted more content than the editors were capable of being comfortable (for various good technical and emotional reasons). So, debating about putting in POIs or not, deleting them, etc., seems a bit silly when the app could do well with more content, both that which shows on the map and that which does not.

Yes, but the other thing we discussed at the meet-up was that there is a difference between Landmarks and POIs and they need to be separate systems. Landmarks are polygons that may or may not appear shaded on the client map (a State Park would appear, a Gas Station would not, but would maintain the same MP suppression we currently have). A POI is a pin-point navigation point that Waze can route to. The other part of this is that a landmark, can have one or more associated POIs - think of a landmark named "Waze State Park", with two associate POIs names "Main Entrance" and "East Entrance". When someone searched for "Waze State Park", they would get two results "Waze State Park - Main Entrance" and "Waze State Park - East Entrance" for navigation purposes.
AndyPoms
Waze Global Champs
Waze Global Champs
 
Posts: 7159
Joined: Tue Dec 27, 2011 1:34 pm
Location: Hartford, CT
Has thanked: 128 times
Been thanked: 1314 times

Re: Landmark - Best Practices US

Postby Ericular » Wed Jun 12, 2013 2:14 pm

vectorspace wrote:What I heard, very resoundingly clear from Ehud, was that he wanted more content. He probably wanted more content than the editors were capable of being comfortable (for various good technical and emotional reasons). So, debating about putting in POIs or not, deleting them, etc., seems a bit silly when the app could do well with more content, both that which shows on the map and that which does not.


It would be nice to see a roadmap of when the client might be improved to either have selectable landmark/POI layers, or more intelligent display based on zoom level and road type. One of the most frustrating parts of map editing for me is having to do non-intuitive things just to cater to the shortcomings of the client. In theory, the more Waze knows, the better it can be. The sooner I can snap to a parking lot road in a confusing shopping complex and get routed to a main road, the better my experience will be. The more landmarks Waze knows the accurate location of, the better it can guide me to them (in theory).

I have some landmarks mapped in my area that are probably valid landmarks that would help people navigate, but they look bad on the client so I consider removing them. It's too bad. Same with points of interest that don't bring you to the ideal location. It's too bad the answer is to improve third-party POI providers when a location is off or business is incorrect, rather than improving Waze.

Still, I understand why things are the way they are, and in most areas road and turn cleanup is priority #1. But once that's completed and thousands of eager map editors are left with nothing to do, I think we could keep up with a lot of these less-popular landmarks types.
Ericular
 
Posts: 25
Joined: Mon May 21, 2012 8:58 pm
Location: Minnesota
Has thanked: 6 times
Been thanked: 7 times

Re: Landmark - Best Practices US

Postby kentsmith9 » Wed Jun 12, 2013 4:09 am

TruckOttr wrote:
jasonh300 wrote:Unfortunately, it isn't repositionable, and it seems to try to computer the geometric center of the landmark, but how it arrives at that is often a mystery.


It's a centroid of the polygon formed by the landmark. It helps when determining if a landmark is visible or not, when it should be drawn and in what detail. It's not ideal for use as the navigation point for a landmark. Typically one would use one of the polygon edges and navigate to that edge.

The use of centroids is one of the reasons that Waze will sometimes route you to the backside of an address vs. the street that the address is on.

Actually the center of the landmark is simply the center of the max X-distance and max Y-distance covered by the polygon.
kentsmith9
Waze Global Champs
Waze Global Champs
 
Posts: 5282
Joined: Mon Apr 23, 2012 3:33 pm
Location: SF/SJ Bay Area of Northern California
Has thanked: 1381 times
Been thanked: 1595 times

Re: Landmark - Best Practices US

Postby razor2k » Wed Jun 12, 2013 3:08 am

Nope, it's buisiness as usual. I have a gut feeling that Noam and the gang are true to their word and not much is going to change with us editor's. At least in the next 2 years or so. Hang in there guys!

Sent from my SPH-D710 using Tapatalk 2
razor2k
 
Posts: 696
Joined: Thu May 10, 2012 8:40 pm
Location: Saint Petersburg, FL
Has thanked: 62 times
Been thanked: 54 times

Re: Landmark - Best Practices US

Postby razor2k » Wed Jun 12, 2013 2:58 am

TruckOttr wrote:
What I heard, very resoundingly clear from Ehud, was that he wanted more content. He probably wanted more content than the editors were capable of being comfortable (for various good technical and emotional reasons). So, debating about putting in POIs or not, deleting them, etc., seems a bit silly when the app could do well with more content, both that which shows on the map and that which does not.


Now that it's official that Google is acquiring Waze, does it make sense for us to either hold off or check with Waze to see what their direction and intentions are? Although this was discussed in May, it's quite possible that this will be changing with the acquisition, even with Waze remaining operationally independent for a few years.



Sent from my SPH-D710 using Tapatalk 2
razor2k
 
Posts: 696
Joined: Thu May 10, 2012 8:40 pm
Location: Saint Petersburg, FL
Has thanked: 62 times
Been thanked: 54 times

Re: Landmark - Best Practices US

Postby TruckOttr » Tue Jun 11, 2013 8:23 pm

What I heard, very resoundingly clear from Ehud, was that he wanted more content. He probably wanted more content than the editors were capable of being comfortable (for various good technical and emotional reasons). So, debating about putting in POIs or not, deleting them, etc., seems a bit silly when the app could do well with more content, both that which shows on the map and that which does not.


Now that it's official that Google is acquiring Waze, does it make sense for us to either hold off or check with Waze to see what their direction and intentions are? Although this was discussed in May, it's quite possible that this will be changing with the acquisition, even with Waze remaining operationally independent for a few years.
TruckOttr
 
Posts: 314
Joined: Thu Jul 26, 2012 6:54 pm
Has thanked: 16 times
Been thanked: 82 times

PreviousNext

Return to United States

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users