voludu2 wrote:I wonder if it would more useful to commercial drivers to be directed to a RR segment or to a point or area place with the stop point on a drivable road.

I'm not a commercial driver; I only imagine I'd like to be directed to an appropriate entrance to a rail yard if I needed to pick up or deliver cargo or deliver supplies to offices in the yard, etc.

Agreed that they need some kind of guidance.
But given that we don't map multiple lines, particularly "BBQ" yards, and like a military installation, I would imagine there is some kind of direction provided by yard staff.

For such specific destinations, I have to wonder if it is simply not an appropriate use for Waze.
Place points, or even areas, would seem to be more useful since they can be the navigation target, unlike RR lines, AND given that segment names are not consistently displayed.

I favor no names and no priority to change them right away.

Yes, please. I would like the names to go away

* A railroad segment that has a name should keep that name, as long as it meets the criteria to be named

Quite possibly, a railroad segment with the name "Railroad" alone should not meet the criteria for being named in the first place.

So perhaps something like this, where the main bullet point covers / includes previouslynamed segments as well as currently unnamed railroad segments:

* Railroad segments that meet all of these criteria should have a name. All other railroad segments should have the "none" box checked.
- the owner or appropriate name for the track the segment represents is known without question
- there is a single appropriate name for the track (If the segment represents two or more tracks that should be named differently, check the "none" box).
- the segment represents actual tracks, regardless of ownership (if it is an abandoned right-of-way, check the "none" box)
- The railroad segment name is something other than simply "Railroad".

I wonder if it would more useful to commercial drivers to be directed to a RR segment or to a point or area place with the stop point on a drivable road.

I'm not a commercial driver; I only imagine I'd like to be directed to an appropriate entrance to a rail yard if I needed to pick up or deliver cargo or deliver supplies to offices in the yard, etc.

The only need is to select segments with one click. But we could live without it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I have to agree that the new labeling takes over and distracts from its navigational display purpose. Most Wazers aren't going to know or care about who owns a line.

At the very least, this line of the wiki should be updated now until a decision is made:

Railroads should be labeled as such in the editor. For the time being they won't make it to the client indeed, but in the future we might want to use them for display purposes.

I see no rush on the change's implementation as well. We still have a lot of railroads at -5 and with no junctions. Its just an additional task to add while going through that.

My biggest priority would be somewhere where a railroad runs in the median of a street. I'm not sure of the priority (rail name trumping street or vice versa), but road name would be more important there.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

We seem to be down to two camps then. We all agree that most railroads don't need to be named, but it seems there's not a full consensus of whether it's just all railroads or leave some exceptions for navigational value.

I understand commuter rail and tourist railroads (these seem to be the only exceptions listed so far) could provide some aid to drivers. However, I'm not sure having an entire line labeled is useful. For commuter rail, we could have stations as area places and that would provide adequate labeling along the line. As for tourist railroads, they typically have a small number of stations, which leaves large swaths (typically in rural areas) labeled.

I would advocate labeling all stations as area places as an alternative (tourist railroads could use train station as primary with tourist secondary). If some one is navigating to a railroad, that is where they're headed.

As a railfan, having the names was great, but their prominence as a label really distracts from Waze's primary road function. An unlabeled line with stations keeps it simple and usable for the user, while allowing us to retain all of the information for junctions and separate data from parallel roads.

Agreed. If anything, labeling could make it appear more legitimately as a road


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk