Landmark - Best Practices US
Posted: Thu Aug 08, 2013 1:39 am
Can the USA Landmark thread be pinned\stickied (if not already)?
Waze: outsmarting traffic together
https://www.waze.com/forum/
Actually the center of the landmark is simply the center of the max X-distance and max Y-distance covered by the polygon.TruckOttr wrote: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.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.
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.
Yes that is a landmark guideline, not the roads in the lots. I will make that distinction (once we get around to adding the damn thing in the wiki).shawndoc wrote:I believe you are talking about the Landmark post? It is referring to drawing in the parking lot landmark, not the parking lot roads.CookeCity wrote: Which is why I am confused...what you say makes sense to me...but in the Landmark Guidelines it states:and that the only parking lots that should be mapped are:Please note that parking lots at businesses are not mapped.With the mapping of pay parking lots under consideration.Park & Ride/Commuter Lots are mapped at the fence line
We don't know how the gas stations in the hidden layer and the ones in the landmarks layer affect each other (if at all). It may be that the ones in the hidden layer actually suppress reports, and if so, it would be a waste of time to add them to the landmarks layer. We don't know if they intend to merge the two layers at some time. If they do, we'll have duplicates to delete. Since we don't have answers, because no one answers our questions, I err on the side of doing less work.shawndoc wrote:Was that from Waze? I would think it would be okay to add them if you are doing it to suppress traffic and error reports.jasonh300 wrote:A gas station landmark will suppress reports there, and would be more correct than a parking lot. However, it was mentioned a week or two ago not to add any gas stations until we got to some point with the gas prices functionality. I'm not sure if that's correct or still the case.
I wasn't there, so I don't know the context, but "as much content as possible" does not make a map better. It has the opposite effect.vectorspace wrote:I keep going back to the Meetup 2013 where Ehud said he wanted as much content as possible to make the map better.
Absolutely. But the devs haven't provided a way to create anything like this yet. I've asked; no response.PhantomSoul wrote:Shouldn't POI's be points instead of complex polygons, just from a database perspective?
Very good point, and a good argument for not establishing any sort of "best practices" until it's been decided whether or not point symbols for POIs are forthcoming.Complex polygons are OK for true landmarks, which, by definition, are supposed to be few and far between (i.e., you really should not see 6 different landmarks on a single block of road; most of those things would probably not be actual landmarks then). There's no limit, however, to how many POI's you could have in any given area though.