Given the present conditions, that sounds like as good a plan as any for the handling of PLA type usage.

tl;dr

I will confess I haven't read this thread in the entirety, but I wonder if this couldn't just be put forward as a deficiency. We're going to run into problems with new editors (parking lots are easy to start editing with) following the guidance in the WME tooltip.

PesachZ wrote:

doctorkb wrote:tl;dr

I will confess I haven't read this thread in the entirety, but I wonder if this couldn't just be put forward as a deficiency. We're going to run into problems with new editors (parking lots are easy to start editing with) following the guidance in the WME tooltip.

I'm not sure I understand what you mean "put forward as a deficiency".
If you mean that it is a limitation of the software that should be fixed, this is already on the roadmap as the features are being built out. They are aware of it an is current limitations like I posted here viewtopic.php?f=1636&t=216110&start=40& ... p#p1598616

Yes, a software deficiency.

By publishing separate guidance in the wiki from what is published in the tool, we're opening ourselves up to constantly having to fix newbie editor mistakes.

If Waze wants the parking lot system to be functional, it needs to work correctly, not have us "hack the map" for this sort of benefit.

My vote is to stick with what WME documents - namely, if the lot is for use only by patrons, it is marked as Restricted. If Waze sees how useless the current implementation is, they'll change the implementation.

If the tooltip can be updated, great.

If the tooltip is not fixed, then the proposed wiki entry is just another map hack, and should be avoided. This appears to be a clear deficiency in yet-another-half-baked Waze feature deployment.

Just as we've had ongoing issues with the Hospital / Medical Care place category THAT WE PREDICTED WHEN THEY LAUNCHED THE NEW CATEGORIES around the time of the Vegas meetup and they're now fixing, creating a larger headache, it makes sense to just do it right first - even if the implementation hasn't caught up.

The bottom line is if Waze wants the parking to function correctly, they need to implement it correctly - that needs to be on the devs, NOT on the editors.

sketch wrote:We are making a policy decision in the United States to keep certain lots purposefully inaccurately marked as public for a time until Waze furthers their implementation of the parking project. Canada does not have to comply if it does not want to.

Well, you guys are making more work for us (since we now need to add an exception for the US rule), and delaying the fixing of the actual problem by hacking the map.

Keep up the good fight.

I'm going to also point out that we're getting lumped in with the mass fixes that Waze has had to institute for other things (e.g. Hospitals) - it seems to be something they can't do on a country-by-country basis.

Sure would be nice if things could just get done right the first time.

sketch wrote:It is not our job to provide guidance that is acceptable to Canada.

Perhaps not, but it is your job to not hack the map except when truly warranted. This is an incomplete feature that Waze deployed too soon.

At any rate, the idea that whatever we are doing with our map will somehow affect the speed of WME & app development is laughable.

Funny. We made progress when we told them that the parking feature shouldn't be implemented until a few things were fixed up, and they fixed them fairly quickly (by Waze standards).

The parking feature seems to be overwhelmingly low on most editors "wish list" - this is a Waze initiative - if they want it to work correctly, they should make it work correctly, not expect us to adapt.

Don't worry. I'll be proposing we sever our wiki attachment from the US here shortly.

And the overwhelming dominance from the US regional approaches, too.

If Waze has to deal with us as an "infrastructure" rather than a country, we expect equal footing -- when they ask to do something about the hacks you've made, I'll refer to this conversation.

That works. AFAIK, we use en_US as well.

Please let me know if it is approved.

Other sections of the wiki page need updated to match the naming section, like the restricted parking section.