Waze doesn't work w/ simple 'on' or 'off' turn restrictions. It applies penalties to routing actions that are restricted. The only way to make sure nobody will be routed down a mapped road is to not 'junction' it to the highway.
https://j.mp/1ofo6nc https://www.waze.com/wiki/images/5/5a/W ... 00k_4c.png
Delaware State Manager / Level 4 editor - Philadelphia metro
Samsung Galaxy S5 (Android 4.4.2) w/ Waze v3.9.0.0
Delaware State Manager / Level 4 editor - Philadelphia metro
Samsung Galaxy S5 (Android 4.4.2) w/ Waze v3.9.0.0
You would think that would be the case, but it's not impossible based on how Waze operates. Don't get me wrong, it's extremely rare as the routing penalty is very very high, but it could still happen.MGODLEW wrote:How can that be? For example: If I'm driving down a road that connects to a T-intersection BUT has a concrete divider going down the middle of the main road with traffic going only in 1 direction on each side of the divider and only allows turns coming from 1 direction. With the proper turning restrictions enabled, Waze will not route you to turn onto the side road Thru the concrete divider? Same rule applies to this, no?MReiser4670 wrote:Waze doesn't work w/ simple 'on' or 'off' turn restrictions. It applies penalties to routing actions that are restricted. The only way to make sure nobody will be routed down a mapped road is to not 'junction' it to the highway.
https://j.mp/1ofo6nc https://www.waze.com/wiki/images/5/5a/W ... 00k_4c.png
Delaware State Manager / Level 4 editor - Philadelphia metro
Samsung Galaxy S5 (Android 4.4.2) w/ Waze v3.9.0.0
Delaware State Manager / Level 4 editor - Philadelphia metro
Samsung Galaxy S5 (Android 4.4.2) w/ Waze v3.9.0.0
Doesn't a background process generate MPs or some other kind of request for investigation when a road segment is disconnected from other nearby segments? For example, isn't that why we put the CONST ZN suffix after the name when a segment is temporarily closed for construction?
If we include these turnarounds and simply leave them disconnected to avoid routing, won't that litter the map with "disconnected segment" errors?
If we include these turnarounds and simply leave them disconnected to avoid routing, won't that litter the map with "disconnected segment" errors?
https://images2.imgbox.com/6b/db/BSSGdrWs_o.pnghttps://s.waze.tools/coor.pnghttps://s.waze.tools/lcus.pnghttps://s.waze.tools/mntr.pnghttps://s.waze.tools/betc.png
https://s.waze.tools/c6.png
Waze Editing Manual | USA Road Types | USA Forum
Mint Mobile (T-Mobile) iPhone 15 Pro / iOS (latest) / Waze (latest/beta)
https://s.waze.tools/c6.png
Waze Editing Manual | USA Road Types | USA Forum
Mint Mobile (T-Mobile) iPhone 15 Pro / iOS (latest) / Waze (latest/beta)
Actually, it will. A restricted turn just has a penalty. If the penalty is less than going a different route, Waze will route you through the restricted turn. It will even route you down the wrong way on a one-way street if going another way is worse than the penalty applied for going the wrong way. This is in part because there are a number of incorrectly marked roads and turn restrictions and Waze wouldn't be able to get you anywhere in some locations that haven't yet been cleaned up. Also, there are times when a traffic backup gets to be so bad that police will route you where you aren't normally allowed and Waze is basically following the same practice. I agree that it's illegal and in cases with barriers, basically impossible, but that's just how Waze works.With the proper turning restrictions enabled, Waze will not route you to turn onto the side road Thru the concrete divider?
A private road should have enough penalty to avoid routing through it (service roads aren't the same and I've seen those being used for those Authorized Vehicles Only connections between divided highways), but with enough traffic problems, Waze could potentially route you through it. We don't know the penalties applied, or at least if anyone does know, it isn't being made public here. So we don't know how difficult it is to be routed through a private road. Without that knowledge, it makes it difficult to have an official stance on using them. We could just leave them disconnected and that solves the problem. You'd see the road, but couldn't route on it no matter what. Consider the use of those is fairly limited, we'd get few MPs caused by driving over disconnected segments, but we'd still get them. So which is better? No MPs, but possible bad routing? Or good routing, with possible MPs? Personally, I think having it connected as a private road is a good option, but that is certainly not an official stance and there are better options that could be done if Waze was willing to add them.
https://www.waze.com/wiki/images/5/5a/W ... M_only.png
Previously Area Manager: Michigan - Northern LP.
Waze running on Samsung Galaxy S21+.
Previously Area Manager: Michigan - Northern LP.
Waze running on Samsung Galaxy S21+.
Private Road has the most penalty of those other than that people can choose to avoid dirt roads, which presumably would prevent routing on those entirely unless they are at the beginning or end of the trip. At this time, private road is the right one to use. And unless someone says it's the official method, I don't think disconnecting them would be a good thing to do. Others are just going to come along and reconnect them. Personally, I think that drivers need to just know not to drive through them regardless of the GPS.
https://www.waze.com/wiki/images/5/5a/W ... M_only.png
Previously Area Manager: Michigan - Northern LP.
Waze running on Samsung Galaxy S21+.
Previously Area Manager: Michigan - Northern LP.
Waze running on Samsung Galaxy S21+.
Regarding #2, it sounds like they are already mapped, so disconnecting sounds like what you're saying should be done instead of deleting them or leaving them connected. Or are you saying that leaving it as-is if there are other edits to do instead? If you think they should be disconnected instead of being left as-is, do you think this should be standard policy for these types of roads for all of the US? If so, I can work on disconnecting ones that are mapped along my routes. That would cover a good chunk of the east coast. I don't plan on mapping ones that are not mapped already, but I can disconnect them if that is what we want the policy to be country-wide. Or do we want to wait until all of the champs get a chance to weight in on it before making that change?
https://www.waze.com/wiki/images/5/5a/W ... M_only.png
Previously Area Manager: Michigan - Northern LP.
Waze running on Samsung Galaxy S21+.
Previously Area Manager: Michigan - Northern LP.
Waze running on Samsung Galaxy S21+.
Well, you can't route onto a disconnected segment and if it's locked at least at level 3 (though 5 may be better), it's unlikely to get reconnected. Although I understand some of the problem with getting routing working correctly so it doesn't route down the wrong roads, it really shouldn't be difficult to mark specific kinds of roads so they can never be routed on. If there isn't a means of doing that directly, then add a million point penalty to routing down any type of segment that is not allowed to be routed on. Or, if you think a million points isn't enough, make it a billion. It would be basically impossible to be routed on anything with that high of a penalty and we already have a penalty system in place, so it shouldn't be that hard to implement. It *should* be just a matter of adding a penalty to those road types in the database unless they hard coded everything. In the end, they just need a flag for non-driveable that can be applied to certain road types so they aren't routed on no matter what, but the penalty system is already in place and could be set up very quickly for the time being until they have time to program a non-driveable flag for road types. Either way, until they do something with it, as long as they are disconnected, they aren't actually harming anything.
https://www.waze.com/wiki/images/5/5a/W ... M_only.png
Previously Area Manager: Michigan - Northern LP.
Waze running on Samsung Galaxy S21+.
Previously Area Manager: Michigan - Northern LP.
Waze running on Samsung Galaxy S21+.
We can test all we want, we've seen these added before in just the same way and still we'll see URs that show people are being routed on them.
Waze routing operates on a penalty system. Nothing is truly forbidden to the routing server as long as it is connected to the road grid. So our rule is that nothing that is truly forbidden shall be connected to the road grid. Same as walking trails and railroads.
Waze routing operates on a penalty system. Nothing is truly forbidden to the routing server as long as it is connected to the road grid. So our rule is that nothing that is truly forbidden shall be connected to the road grid. Same as walking trails and railroads.
ALL US EDITORS READ: New USA road type guidance
the guidance linked above is now almost a decade old, but the link gives me a laugh every time i see it, so it stays (:
assistant regional coordinator • south central region • usa
waze global champ • beta leader • and more • new orleans
bye bye fuelly badge! i'm an EV guy now!
the guidance linked above is now almost a decade old, but the link gives me a laugh every time i see it, so it stays (:
assistant regional coordinator • south central region • usa
waze global champ • beta leader • and more • new orleans
bye bye fuelly badge! i'm an EV guy now!
And is why these types of roads, walking trails, boardwalks, etc should be drawn, disconnected from the road network and locked to a level other than 1 or 2. They are waaay too tempting for the newbie editor trying to find something to do. Deleting them does nothing, because a newbie editor will say "Oooo, here's something i can do!" and add them. It's quite easy to get into a "Lather, rinse, repeat" cycle if you just keep deleting. Drawing, disconnecting and locking them re-directs newbies toward other things that are, hopefully,less damaging when their edits go wrong.AlanOfTheBerg wrote:You may, but keep in mind 1) other editors who don't know this may try to connect them to the roads, which is why we lock railroads at rank 5 or 6.MGODLEW wrote:I will go back and disconnect them but leave them mapped
https://sign.wme-tools.com/images/signa ... d-0200.pnghttps://sign.wme-tools.com/images/signa ... ones-4.png
Hayward, CA, Reno/Sparks, NV, Elko/Spring Creek, NV and apparently the N. NV section of Portola Valley, CA.
Hayward, CA, Reno/Sparks, NV, Elko/Spring Creek, NV and apparently the N. NV section of Portola Valley, CA.
I still say they shouldn't be mapped at all. They have nothing to do with traffic or directions. Using them (even with a disabled vehicle) will warrant a ticket. I understand the use of them for emergency vehicles, but the general public is to stay off of them unless directed by LEO or other authority.
Just wazeting my time to help you waze your route smoothly.
Re: Mapping Emergency & Authorized Vehicles Only & Service R