New Page - Tunnels

Moderator: Unholy

Re: New Page - Tunnels

Postby kentsmith9 » Sat Feb 22, 2014 12:08 am

I am willing to second the proposal to recommend Tunnels be marked with something below "Ground" elevation even if it is just in case.

Note that we we building a message box template that we can place in sections that are providing information based more on speculation rather than known fact so we can more easily track where in the Wiki we say these things and then periodically come back and review/update/remove those comments. This would be a good example.
kentsmith9
Waze Global Champs
Waze Global Champs
 
Posts: 5522
Joined: Mon Apr 23, 2012 3:33 pm
Location: SF/SJ Bay Area of Northern California
Has thanked: 1469 times
Been thanked: 1670 times

Re: New Page - Tunnels

Postby CBenson » Fri Feb 21, 2014 5:39 pm

sketch wrote:And I assume anything that does have valid GPS points for the whole time won't trigger that particular merger function.

That would makes sense, but I'm not quite as optimistic.
CBenson
Waze Global Champs
Waze Global Champs
 
Posts: 10330
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2010 9:13 pm
Location: Crownsville, MD, US
Has thanked: 1069 times
Been thanked: 2355 times

Re: New Page - Tunnels

Postby sketch » Fri Feb 21, 2014 5:25 pm

kentsmith9 wrote:But before we go through all this, shouldn't we understand what Waze back end does with this information? If they assume a tunnel when below "ground" elevation, what is happening to our underpasses we have below ground?

Yeah, good point. I wasn't there, but from what I understand from the meeting notes, it's to help the merger process understand that there may be a gap in GPS points for a time. So maybe it's not so bad for underpasses either. And I assume anything that does have valid GPS points for the whole time won't trigger that particular merger function. But yes, we should get this info.
sketch
Waze Global Champs
Waze Global Champs
 
Posts: 6011
Joined: Sat Aug 08, 2009 6:13 pm
Location: New Orleans, LA
Has thanked: 1482 times
Been thanked: 2025 times

Re: New Page - Tunnels

Postby kentsmith9 » Fri Feb 21, 2014 4:54 pm

sketch wrote:I would imagine whatever Street View says is better than nothing, and nothing is exactly what we have for GPS data in tunnels. I use it sometimes to help in New Orleans, where big old trees can make some roads basically impossible to see from the air.

Nice. Had not considered that one either. Frankly I had no idea the street view was forcing the icon to the correct GPS location. I think there may be other things we can get from that. I think we should add that tip to nanoRep and the Best Practice pages.

sketch wrote:Regarding the elevation, I'm basically thinking "why not?" It certainly makes sense to have tunnels at a low but not railroad-low elevation—well; underwater tunnels, anyway, rather than tunnels through mountains and all.

I think the "why not" is because tunnels are not always below other roads when in the mountains as you mentioned. Current guidelines say to use relative elevation, but we have 0 saying "ground" in the editor. So mountain tunnels could be negative only if you consider there is ground above them. I suppose if the road entering the tunnel were elevated at +1 being on supports, the tunnel section could be -1 with no problem.

But before we go through all this, shouldn't we understand what Waze back end does with this information? If they assume a tunnel when below "ground" elevation, what is happening to our underpasses we have below ground?
kentsmith9
Waze Global Champs
Waze Global Champs
 
Posts: 5522
Joined: Mon Apr 23, 2012 3:33 pm
Location: SF/SJ Bay Area of Northern California
Has thanked: 1469 times
Been thanked: 1670 times

Re: New Page - Tunnels

Postby sketch » Thu Feb 20, 2014 6:47 am

I would imagine whatever Street View says is better than nothing, and nothing is exactly what we have for GPS data in tunnels. I use it sometimes to help in New Orleans, where big old trees can make some roads basically impossible to see from the air.

Regarding the elevation, I'm basically thinking "why not?" It certainly makes sense to have tunnels at a low but not railroad-low elevation—well; underwater tunnels, anyway, rather than tunnels through mountains and all.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk 2
sketch
Waze Global Champs
Waze Global Champs
 
Posts: 6011
Joined: Sat Aug 08, 2009 6:13 pm
Location: New Orleans, LA
Has thanked: 1482 times
Been thanked: 2025 times

Re: New Page - Tunnels

Postby kentsmith9 » Thu Feb 20, 2014 2:26 am

sketch wrote:Should we add a rule that all tunnels shall be set to negative elevations? All to -3 (unless tunnels cross underwater)?

edit Just found this: https://www.waze.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=212&t=64030

CBenson and I were just talking about this. My response and proposal:
Kentsmith9 to CBenson wrote:If I recall they were using that logic in an upcoming feature for Tunnel recognition, but there was no functionality related to it yet. I would just leave it out of the Wiki, or possibly put it on the talk page of Tunnels after it is built.


sketch wrote:Should we add text explaining that Street View can be used to determine a curved tunnel's geometry, the location of ramps, etc.?

Great idea. I had not considered this, but as long as the inside of the tunnel is recorded by Google Street view we are golden. Also I just played around with this is Berkeley and Street View will show you were on the visual map you are in relation to the Street View bubble. As you step forward in the street view the bubble on the Visual map shows you the current location underground. I can now map the road to the bubble as I step through the tunnel.

Or do we already know the GPS location of the street view is not that accurate and this is all for not? :(
kentsmith9
Waze Global Champs
Waze Global Champs
 
Posts: 5522
Joined: Mon Apr 23, 2012 3:33 pm
Location: SF/SJ Bay Area of Northern California
Has thanked: 1469 times
Been thanked: 1670 times

Re: New Page - Tunnels

Postby sketch » Wed Feb 19, 2014 8:42 pm

2 things:

  1. Should we add a rule that all tunnels shall be set to negative elevations? All to -3 (unless tunnels cross underwater)?
  2. Should we add text explaining that Street View can be used to determine a curved tunnel's geometry, the location of ramps, etc.?

edit Just found this: https://www.waze.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=212&t=64030
sketch
Waze Global Champs
Waze Global Champs
 
Posts: 6011
Joined: Sat Aug 08, 2009 6:13 pm
Location: New Orleans, LA
Has thanked: 1482 times
Been thanked: 2025 times

Re: New Page - Tunnels

Postby kentsmith9 » Wed Feb 19, 2014 6:00 am

I was thinking about moving ahead with this current proposal (I had since forgotten about it). I am bumping this one in case anyone missed it the first time around.
kentsmith9
Waze Global Champs
Waze Global Champs
 
Posts: 5522
Joined: Mon Apr 23, 2012 3:33 pm
Location: SF/SJ Bay Area of Northern California
Has thanked: 1469 times
Been thanked: 1670 times

Re: New Page - Tunnels

Postby harling » Wed Nov 21, 2012 7:43 am

martinchaney wrote:There needs to be some way of marking segments as tunnels so Waze knows not to expect GPS reception in them. As it is, Waze is generating automated map errors because it thinks people are getting more directly from point A to point B and thinks there's a missing road.

My introduction to the IGN editors was the addition of a freeway segment connecting two ends of a tunnel in a straight line, intersecting and junctioned with a couple ramps and service roads along the way. They obviously saw the GPS track and concluded that there must be a new bridge there...
harling
 
Posts: 1736
Joined: Wed Oct 27, 2010 8:42 pm
Location: Eastern MA
Has thanked: 16 times
Been thanked: 123 times

Re: New Page - Tunnels

Postby martinchaney » Tue Nov 20, 2012 10:32 pm

There needs to be some way of marking segments as tunnels so Waze knows not to expect GPS reception in them. As it is, Waze is generating automated map errors because it thinks people are getting more directly from point A to point B and thinks there's a missing road.
martinchaney
 
Posts: 3
Joined: Tue Oct 09, 2012 10:46 pm
Has thanked: 0 time
Been thanked: 0 time

PreviousNext

Return to Wiki Updates and Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users