While this idea has some merit, it does significantly increase the complexity of the map. Now, there may be very real benefits to doing it, but there can also be pitfalls. One of which is the aforementioned GPS accuracy. Imagine you get onto an exit ramp for which there are three parallel ramp segments, each to get you to the right place most efficiently. GPS gets goofy and thinks you are now on a different ramp than you should be: instead of you now being snapped to the left-turn ramp, your GPS and Waze has you snapped to the right-only ramp, thereby 1) making the next turn worthless, and 2) the next several minutes of re-routing trying to get you back going the right direction. If this is a driver unfamiliar with the area, then we are talking about a potential serious problem.

I will say that I too have tried this in a few intersections in my area early on in my Waze editing career, and the benefits, IMO, were too small given the potential massive increase of complexity and potential for seriously bad routing.

I understand the purpose here, but I fear it is starting down a slippery slope of mapping out lanes all over the place. I'd like to get some direction from Waze too. They may have plans for the future along these lines, and/or may already have code in the routing algorithm which account for where Wazers are driving to. (I am assuming here that this discussion is not just about the visual display but how these situations affect routing.)

gettingthere wrote:But again to the OP - how much time difference between each turn? If it's one light cycle 30-60 seconds it's not really a big deal.

I think everyone has misread his OP a bit. I think he's talking about a 2 or more lane exit where the left lane comes to a light and is left turn only, but the right lane has either a stop sign/yield or continuous lane to merge with the crossing street's traffic. The "problem" is if there's no junction and split on exit ramp, the left turn traffic that backs up and has to wait for the light dominates the average speed of the combined ramp and can potentially make it an undesirable route to the routing algorithm.

Example. Look at the average speeds of the two downstream segments. The segment heading west has a continuous lane and no stop until the light at S Yosemite St). The segment that's primarily used for turning left to eastbound Arapahoe has to wait at the light, but it's also a protected right turn with turn-on-red allowed for getting to the left turn to southbound S Yosemite St.

Geometry and turn restrictions are set to allow what's legal, not what people sometimes do when the cops aren't there to give them a ticket (like the silver sedan here who was almost certainly headed to southbound S Yosemite St). However I probably have some errors near there as I'm fairly certain there's been some more redesign that I haven't added. I'm fairly certain you can rejoin westbound Arapahoe from the exit ramp to southbound I-25. Next time I go through there I'll hopefully remember to look.

The 'snap to route' during navigation is very strong, so I think this can work. You can always build it back if it does not work...

Waze may have a difficult time placing you on the correct ramp due to GPS accuracy.

How much time are you talking about saving in traffic conditions by taking one turn vs another. 30 seconds? 1 minute?

But again to the OP - how much time difference between each turn? If it's one light cycle 30-60 seconds it's not really a big deal.

Sounds like an idea. Why not test it (and take the hate mail) in one ramp. Post the results if you decide to try it.

Kill me if I try to make you do something stupid.



Sent from this Galaxy

Hi ALl,

bgodette has it 100% right.

In South Africa we drive on the wrong side of the road, so I will transpose the situation to drive on the "right" side of the road.

I travel Westbound on a 5 lane freeway. The rightmost (slow) lanes backs up for approx 1 1/2 mile, crawling at about 5 mph, but even though it has a yield sign, the amount of traffic going into the city is enormous. This lane is for right turn only (north). The second lane moves at about 20 mph, and becomes 3 lanes just before the traffic light. It is a Left turn only (south), crossing traffic, but moves at a steady pace because you are travelling against the flow of traffic. One can count yourself unlucky if you wait for the third change of color on the traffic sign. That leaves the three fast lanes on the freeway... They move along at a steady pace from 40 to 60 mph, depending on whether the idiot up ahead wants to jump the queue and cut in front of the line. I was thinking of doing what I initially said, because it happens frequently that I pass a poor wazer in the left lane, and my speed changes his report, it also influences the bugger that wants to continue straight, because he might be directed off the freeway at the previous exit, and is forced onto a road that generally stands still and very few wazers going there.

I think I will give it a shot for a week or two, and see what happens. Will keep you all posted.

Dx.

P.S.(1) Damn, this transposing thing is tougher than I thought, kmh -> mph; left -> right; I hope I got it right.
P.S.(2) For the Joburg guys out there, the intersection I am referring to is William Nicol, travelling from Rivonia. Update me on your experience with the changes please.

I hear you. Yes I don't think the discussion is only about the one or the other. (display/routing) Obviously the display on the client will become more cluttered, but the trade-off is obviously a more accurate routing prediction. What's your thoughts? In this case, if I want to turn on the slow lane, it might be quicker to just continue straight and take the next exit, but turning in the opposite direction will cause this to be the better route.