[USA] Landmark Guidelines - Request for Comments

Image 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: [USA] Landmark Guidelines - Request for Comments

Postby CrackedLCD » Thu Jan 31, 2013 6:55 am

daknife wrote:Insta-cares also serve the same public service as Hospitals, i.e. somewhere to go when you get hurt. As I said, this needs discussion. And Hospitals are also (at least where I live) all run by private corporations, how are we not advertising for them?


How about a compromise, and we only landmark facilities with 24 hour care? That would eliminate most of the little places, and most of the 24 hour urgent care type places tend to be a little more comprehensive in what they offer versus every run of the mill doc-in-the-box.
~CrackedLCD
AM for Baldwin-Mobile Cos., AL // Grenada-LeFlore-Carroll Cos., MS // Escambia-Santa Rosa Cos., FL // CM for the USA

Moto Droid Turbo (Android 5.1) on Verizon Wireless
Image
CrackedLCD
Area Manager
Area Manager
 
Posts: 423
Joined: Thu Aug 02, 2012 12:37 am
Location: LA (Lower Alabama)
Has thanked: 96 times
Been thanked: 63 times

Re: [USA] Landmark Guidelines - Request for Comments

Postby CrackedLCD » Thu Jan 31, 2013 7:06 am

pjlasl wrote:Sure thing. From what I have seen, those parking lot roads/private roads get abused in commercial areas quite a bit...you should not have roads going around McDonalds ...


Well yes, you should, if it serves to suppress problem reports. This will be especially important if Waze globally implements the landmark guideline from the OP that states that we should only use the parking lot landmark for municipal & pay lots.

Before this landmarks discussion heated up and there wasn't much consensus, I did a test in my area and used the parking lot landmark to suppress automatic reports, naming the lots for some of the businesses they covered. It did suppress traffic reports but it cluttered the maps a bit. I'm going to do a bit of editing and convert some of those to parking lot roads so my area falls more in line with these guidelines. I know they're not set in stone yet but this is a good time to get my area into shape.
~CrackedLCD
AM for Baldwin-Mobile Cos., AL // Grenada-LeFlore-Carroll Cos., MS // Escambia-Santa Rosa Cos., FL // CM for the USA

Moto Droid Turbo (Android 5.1) on Verizon Wireless
Image
CrackedLCD
Area Manager
Area Manager
 
Posts: 423
Joined: Thu Aug 02, 2012 12:37 am
Location: LA (Lower Alabama)
Has thanked: 96 times
Been thanked: 63 times

Re: [USA] Landmark Guidelines - Request for Comments

Postby AndyPoms » Thu Jan 31, 2013 8:03 am

CrackedLCD wrote:
pjlasl wrote:Sure thing. From what I have seen, those parking lot roads/private roads get abused in commercial areas quite a bit...you should not have roads going around McDonalds ...


Well yes, you should, if it serves to suppress problem reports. This will be especially important if Waze globally implements the landmark guideline from the OP that states that we should only use the parking lot landmark for municipal & pay lots.
We're trying to figure out where that came from in the Wiki (as it used to be the opposite), remember ANYONE can edit the wiki and sneak in changes like that. The wiki also states that small parking lots should not be mapped - contradicting the info about drive-thrus. A MP is "something to look at", not necessarily "something that needs to be fixed. Also, Municipal & Pay Lots are listed as NOT MAPPED at this time (due to the |P| Icon) - read the bullet point.

CrackedLCD wrote:Before this landmarks discussion heated up and there wasn't much consensus, I did a test in my area and used the parking lot landmark to suppress automatic reports, naming the lots for some of the businesses they covered. It did suppress traffic reports but it cluttered the maps a bit. I'm going to do a bit of editing and convert some of those to parking lot roads so my area falls more in line with these guidelines. I know they're not set in stone yet but this is a good time to get my area into shape.
Parking Lot Landmarks do NOT suppress Automatic Traffic Jams, only Missing Road MPs.
Image
Waze Champ & Forum Moderator
USA Country Manager
Senior Area Manager: State of Connecticut
Wiki: Editing | Best Practices | FAQ
AndyPoms
Waze Global Champs
Waze Global Champs
 
Posts: 7086
Joined: Tue Dec 27, 2011 1:34 pm
Location: Hartford, CT
Has thanked: 127 times
Been thanked: 1287 times

Re: [USA] Landmark Guidelines - Request for Comments

Postby Daknife » Thu Jan 31, 2013 8:18 am

Thanks for catching that Andy, that's what I thought the rule was on small lots. But Cracked had the Wiki linked so I didn't correct him.
Image
AM in Utah; CM USA
Utah Forum: Utah Forum
Samsung Galaxy S4 running 4.4 KitKat on Sprint
Daknife
Waze Mentor
Waze Mentor
 
Posts: 1683
Joined: Sat Dec 24, 2011 11:03 pm
Location: Riverdale, Utah
Has thanked: 456 times
Been thanked: 227 times

Re: [USA] Landmark Guidelines - Request for Comments

Postby CrackedLCD » Thu Jan 31, 2013 9:56 am

I certainly didn't mean to spread misinformation and consider myself schooled on this now. If the wiki is wrong, though, it's possibly been wrong for as long as I've been a member (about 5 months) because that's how it was when I read through after I first got editing privileges.

It's a little OT but I'm wary of using 4sq for place data info. I'm a superuser over there and cleanup is an ongoing thing since people can literally create any venue anywhere, with any venue type they choose. It explains why the |P| icons appear in so many random places. Oh well, something else for me to work on. ;)
~CrackedLCD
AM for Baldwin-Mobile Cos., AL // Grenada-LeFlore-Carroll Cos., MS // Escambia-Santa Rosa Cos., FL // CM for the USA

Moto Droid Turbo (Android 5.1) on Verizon Wireless
Image
CrackedLCD
Area Manager
Area Manager
 
Posts: 423
Joined: Thu Aug 02, 2012 12:37 am
Location: LA (Lower Alabama)
Has thanked: 96 times
Been thanked: 63 times

Re: [USA] Landmark Guidelines - Request for Comments

Postby jondrush » Thu Jan 31, 2013 4:36 pm

I'd prefer you change the cemetery to read "internal roads are not normally needed".

I like the open 24 hour suggestion for hospital landmarks and I think it should be added.
Keeping the Waze maps tidy since 2009
jondrush User Page
Image
jondrush
Waze Global Champs
Waze Global Champs
 
Posts: 2629
Joined: Tue Sep 22, 2009 10:20 pm
Location: South Eastern Pennsylvania, USA
Has thanked: 191 times
Been thanked: 497 times

Re: [USA] Landmark Guidelines - Request for Comments

Postby rottielover » Fri Feb 01, 2013 6:20 pm

AndyPoms wrote:We're trying to figure out where that came from in the Wiki (as it used to be the opposite)


jasonh300 wrote:Please report editors who do that sort of thing. Compliance with the Wiki guidelines is not optional


Hence you have the venting and frustrations of the editor base. Too bad there is no "lock system" on the Wiki pages like there is for road segments. (Not long ago I was also the "victim" of a one word change to the wiki regarding time restricted turns)

After reading this over a couple times, I've changed some of my previously held views about landmarks.

Hospitals - What about a requirement that any land marked hospital should be one with 24 hour emergency care. I believe there is a law in the US that states something to the effect that Emergency stabilization care cannot be refused for any reason at these locations. Maybe that could be the standard to base it on?

Tiny Lots - I hate mapping parking lot roads across tiny little business lots to keep the "missing road's" MP's from showing up. Some of these are barely big enough to have the MP trigger. The Parking lot segments add so many more data points (turn restrictions, segments, junctions, etc.) in a lot of cases it hardly seems worth that level of effort. Too bad there's no "hidden parking lot", a landmark type that's sole purpose would be to suppress the MP "missing road" reports, but still not show up in the client. Since we don't have that, no choice but to use the PLot Roads. EDIT: It's also a source of bad edits from inexperienced editors, they see a MP Missing Road and then map every parking space.
Last edited by rottielover on Fri Feb 01, 2013 6:36 pm, edited 1 time in total.
rottielover
Area Manager
Area Manager
 
Posts: 261
Joined: Sat Oct 06, 2012 2:14 am
Location: St. Louis, MO
Has thanked: 14 times
Been thanked: 19 times

Re: [USA] Landmark Guidelines - Request for Comments

Postby DrockMiller » Fri Feb 01, 2013 6:32 pm

I agree that hospitals with 24-hour care is a good rule for mapping hospitals. It goes along with the reason for mapping police and fire departments in that it is a place you can get help if you're in trouble.

2.10 Camp site / RV Park - Not Mapped. Handled by POI Search.


I mentioned this in the original thread, but I think it got overlooked in the scope of a larger discussion. What about mapping camp sites like we do beaches by marking them as parks? Camp sites are many times part of a park anyway and you can't always rely on a POI search to find a campsite.
DrockMiller
Area Manager
Area Manager
 
Posts: 72
Joined: Mon Jul 23, 2012 11:21 pm
Location: Naperville, IL
Has thanked: 127 times
Been thanked: 11 times


[USA] Landmark Guidelines - Request for Comments

Postby pjlasl » Sat Feb 02, 2013 12:15 am

I agree with Rottie about the tiny lots....I don't like mapping them. If I see them ( ie around a restaurant ) I remove them. If the MPs show in gas lots I place a gas staiont landmark.

But there should be a better what to deal with the MPs for small lots.


Sent from my iPhone 4 using Tapatalk
pjlasl
Area Manager
Area Manager
 
Posts: 378
Joined: Tue Nov 13, 2012 2:41 pm
Location: Weatherford, TX
Has thanked: 31 times
Been thanked: 110 times

PreviousNext

Return to United States

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users