Road Types (USA) – comprehensive overhaul of drivable roads

[voludu2]

Cconsulting your regional managers is the best policy on those situations. Violating hybrid fc in my region requires a lot of research AND ongoing issues.

True. The wiki should say so. So new readers understand, when they see "FC violations" that there are valid reasons, and that they should consult routing experts when they have questions.

Many new editors become very perturbed when wiki guidance is violated. So if the wiki can mention that there are valid exceptions and how to learn more about them, this is very helpful.

[voludu2]

Basically, by choosing a the type of the lowest-connected highway type, we are sometimes simply defeating route pruning so Waze will consider the route instead of rejecting it without due consideration. Even if nobody In their right minds would consider the segments in question to be as high a type as what we need to select, or even a highway at all. Even if the segments can't even carry the traffic they are called upon to carry.

Sometimes, the "local road" connecting two highways serves a function similar to ramps. Lots of states represent ramps on their FC maps similarly to how local roads are represented.

Ramps are routing neutral, and can be used to defeat Waze route pruning. But we've decided not to draw the connector roads as ramps (despite the routing-neutral benefits that would bring), because they are not ramps and also because they would look confusing in the app or livemap. So we have to pick the least-detrimental road type for the situation at hand. Or most beneficial, depending on your point of view or current blood sugar / caffeination level .

If there were a checkbox for "this is an essential non-ramp connector road and is routing-neutral" by necessity", we wouldn't have to "lie" to Waze about road types, and put such confusing statements into the wiki to explain why we do it.

[voludu2]

Thanks!

I agree that the draft is an improvement, and should be adopted. More changes can be made, if needed.

[voludu2]

Me too. The concepts give me a framework to hang all the details on.
We all have different learning styles.

In the short term, I'd like to see the already-proposed draft accepted.
After that, we can fine-tune the presentation.

It is possible that we might want to organize some of the pages into "quick reference how-to" and a more detailed discussion with the "why". We would benefit from input from someone who knows something about learning and learning styles. I think a fair # of editors claim some kind of executive function deficit. The community benefits if it is able to make it easy for everyone to learn.

[voludu2]

That is certainly one possible approach.
My vote is to get the info in first, and rearrange it afterwards.
Otherwise, the better is the enemy of the good and it gets to be a long time before we get currently-accepted info onto the wiki page.

[voludu2]

Thanks!
Now -- those who wish to work on reorganizing the information for clarity can get busy with the current version as a starting point. If you like how the speed limits page works, you can have a look and see how PesachZ made it happen.

[voludu2]

Very true. Can you suggest a specific replacement for a specific section to get the ball rolling?

[voludu2]

Not sure.
Is the situation transitional? So that we now have the ability to search for dirt roads and classify them appropriately before they are eventually eliminated (the way the service road type was eventually converted to street, after a waiting period).

Or perhaps it is possible that the "not suitable for low riders" road type will persist, and it will also be possible to mark other road types as unpaved -- as in areas where mH are dirt or gravel or oiled chips. Is oiled chips unpaved or paved?

Maybe one of our champs has heard more about the future plans.

In either case, it should be possible to update the descriptions and images in at least 2 or 3 places to match the new reality.

[voludu2]

Following thread....

I am continuously surprised and a little disappointed with the frequency that somewhat major changes are implemented without the champs being given enough heads up to coordinate updates of our documentation in advance.

[...]
I think you champs should be treated a lot better than that,

Really, all of us. It is difficult to edit the map properly unless we know how to edit the map properly.

We do this for fun. As crazy as that may make us sound,

So, if the Waze team keeps it fun, it is able to attract and retain more editors.
If it keeps us in the dark, we lose motivation and interest because it is not as much fun.