No problem. I was kinda regretting the letter choice myself. I’ll probably switch it before any official action is taken.johnsninja58 wrote:Just giving you a hard time on the number of vowelsHBiede wrote:Not a massive deal compared to deciding to use them, but I debated using Freeway Exit Areas (FEA) instead.johnsninja58 wrote:I like the IEAs (although the acronym does not roll off the tongue right)
https://storage.googleapis.com/wazeoped ... anager.pnghttps://storage.googleapis.com/wazeoped ... Rank_5.pnghttps://s.waze.tools/beta.pnghttps://storage.googleapis.com/wazeoped ... Tester.pnghttps://s.waze.tools/s0100.pnghttps://storage.googleapis.com/wazeoped ... Raider.png
Nebraska State Manager
Nebraska State Manager
Renamed to Freeway Exit Area because FEA rolls off the tongue a bit easier than IEA.HBiede wrote:No problem. I was kinda regretting the letter choice myself. I’ll probably switch it before any official action is taken.johnsninja58 wrote:Just giving you a hard time on the number of vowelsHBiede wrote:
Not a massive deal compared to deciding to use them, but I debated using Freeway Exit Areas (FEA) instead.
https://storage.googleapis.com/wazeoped ... anager.pnghttps://storage.googleapis.com/wazeoped ... Rank_5.pnghttps://s.waze.tools/beta.pnghttps://storage.googleapis.com/wazeoped ... Tester.pnghttps://s.waze.tools/s0100.pnghttps://storage.googleapis.com/wazeoped ... Raider.png
Nebraska State Manager
Nebraska State Manager
To my ears, the X clashesKartografer wrote:What about FXA?
https://storage.googleapis.com/wazeoped ... anager.pnghttps://storage.googleapis.com/wazeoped ... Rank_5.pnghttps://s.waze.tools/beta.pnghttps://storage.googleapis.com/wazeoped ... Tester.pnghttps://s.waze.tools/s0100.pnghttps://storage.googleapis.com/wazeoped ... Raider.png
Nebraska State Manager
Nebraska State Manager
Of course, the name is just a pedantic change.
https://storage.googleapis.com/wazeoped ... anager.pnghttps://storage.googleapis.com/wazeoped ... Rank_5.pnghttps://s.waze.tools/beta.pnghttps://storage.googleapis.com/wazeoped ... Tester.pnghttps://s.waze.tools/s0100.pnghttps://storage.googleapis.com/wazeoped ... Raider.png
Nebraska State Manager
Nebraska State Manager
There's actually a challenge in our wiki standardization when the granularity exists in the middle of the spectrum between the endpoints of USA and State. We can end up with guidance that is close but not exactly the same between states of the same region, or even between regions. This drift may not have been intentional, but is more a side-effect of copy/paste/tweak, and then ultimately additional drift occurs as guidance matures. We could benefit instead from trying to agree upon regional or multi-regional text, and simply transcluding the exact same page into each state's/region's wiki.JoeRodriguez12 wrote:I agree, there really shouldn't be a national page on this if only some regions use it. I would say it would be better for one region to create it and if other regions want to link to it or copy/tweak it to their regions standards, then they can do so.
True Elevation is a great example of this, where individual states started by copying from each other, adjusting, and ultimately some regions adopted regionwide guidance that is clearly 98% the same as others. See SER's Elevation guidance compared to SCR's Elevation guidance. I see wordsmithing that I originally cooked up embedded in those matured revisions, illustrating how pieces of a state's guidance evolves into an almost multi-regional standard.
Where I'm going with this is that I think it's a quality proposal to have a single nugget that multiple states/regions can agree on, one that can be embedded exactly into the participating states/regions. Revision processes can be similar to how national wiki guidance is revised. However, it's not nation-wide guidance, it's a multi-state or multi-regional level designation.
For regions other than SER that may have region-wide guidance but state-based wiki pages, it'd be better to transclude regional text into each state page, than to have copy/paste elements in each state page that ultimately tend to drift apart.
The more that we can standardize through regions or the US, ultimately the more consistent experience we deliver to Wazers.
And of course this is a meta-level proposal that maybe I should break out from this particular thread...
USA Country Manager
https://s.waze.tools/cm.pnghttps://s.waze.tools/beta.pnghttps://s.waze.tools/betc.png
https://s.waze.tools/cm.pnghttps://s.waze.tools/beta.pnghttps://s.waze.tools/betc.png
Minimum thread size in Waze is always 3 pagesHBiede wrote:Oh, lemme tell ya, I was not expecting this much of a discussion from a (initially seemingly) small idea.
USA Country Manager
https://s.waze.tools/cm.pnghttps://s.waze.tools/beta.pnghttps://s.waze.tools/betc.png
https://s.waze.tools/cm.pnghttps://s.waze.tools/beta.pnghttps://s.waze.tools/betc.png
I believe a primary argument for in-app display is for what shows during a live navigation, not a top-down summary view. In the very first carplay example, the exit number AP does not preempt nearby gas stations.
When I decided to argue in favor of this for a while Sunday night at the Mega Meetup (regardless of my true beliefs ), I tried to boil down to another important aspect of Waze Landmarks that the wiki implies, but doesn't necessarily spell out. Landmarks help us identify places, roads, turns, and our own current position relative to the landmark. Interchange APs definitely contribute to that relationship, especially when the road design relative to the surrounding features doesn't necessarily create that at-a-glance identification of the interchange. "Petro is on the far side of the interchange" is more easily identified using an interchange AP than without.
When I decided to argue in favor of this for a while Sunday night at the Mega Meetup (regardless of my true beliefs ), I tried to boil down to another important aspect of Waze Landmarks that the wiki implies, but doesn't necessarily spell out. Landmarks help us identify places, roads, turns, and our own current position relative to the landmark. Interchange APs definitely contribute to that relationship, especially when the road design relative to the surrounding features doesn't necessarily create that at-a-glance identification of the interchange. "Petro is on the far side of the interchange" is more easily identified using an interchange AP than without.
USA Country Manager
https://s.waze.tools/cm.pnghttps://s.waze.tools/beta.pnghttps://s.waze.tools/betc.png
https://s.waze.tools/cm.pnghttps://s.waze.tools/beta.pnghttps://s.waze.tools/betc.png
Of the relativity in general, or the AP helping define the boundary of the interchange? On the latter, I'm doing some searching, and I'm finding places I think we could add one to help clarify the relative position of things (more "busy" urban spots in general). Still searching for an existing one that is a great example already of places/turns near the AP. With mostly just a few plains states having interchange APs, I don't have a ton of dense examples to work with. For many of the plains ones, the interchange is the only notable navigation landmark around at all, and they're big/spread out.DwarfLord wrote:Could you post a screenshot illustrating that effect?herrchin wrote:Landmarks help us identify places, roads, turns, and our own current position relative to the landmark. Interchange APs definitely contribute to that relationship, especially when the road design relative to the surrounding features doesn't necessarily create that at-a-glance identification of the interchange. "Petro is on the far side of the interchange" is more easily identified using an interchange AP than without.
USA Country Manager
https://s.waze.tools/cm.pnghttps://s.waze.tools/beta.pnghttps://s.waze.tools/betc.png
https://s.waze.tools/cm.pnghttps://s.waze.tools/beta.pnghttps://s.waze.tools/betc.png
That's a good distinction on Landmark, because some Landmarks serve their purpose without any text at all. I didn't realize it explicitly, but on my previous point that is in fact what I was arguing for. The actual text is almost irrelevant for that use case, because it's far more about how it's a giant real-world element. Referring back to the very first post's image, the AP makes it a little easier to distinguish the interchange at a glance, vs. having to take in all the roads and have your brain go "ah, combined they're an interchange." Though, if your brain also processes the "Exit 353" text, that only serves to foster faster recognition (at the trade-off of text on the map at all encouraging reading, but we can't argue too much against that without killing all APs...)DwarfLord wrote:Thanks, I'd be interested to see any screenshot, really, that supports the case that a busy driver with only a second to glance at the screen would benefit from an Exit AP, while few if any drivers would need to accept cognitive & visual impairment in order to discern & digest what it says.
I was trying to find a notable, existing example of that where there was even more "clutter" on the map, to where the AP made the interchange stand out easily because other nearby roads made the ramps blend in with the other road noise. On the first post's example, the diamond ramps are rather obvious with not much else around.
I'd consider having the AP having the exit number floating above it a separate purpose, with its own merits.
USA Country Manager
https://s.waze.tools/cm.pnghttps://s.waze.tools/beta.pnghttps://s.waze.tools/betc.png
https://s.waze.tools/cm.pnghttps://s.waze.tools/beta.pnghttps://s.waze.tools/betc.png
Re: [New Page] Interstate Exit Area Place (IEAs)