[Update] Partial restrictions (time and vehicle type)

Moderator: Unholy

Re: [Update] Partial restrictions (time and vehicle type)

Postby qwaletee » Fri Feb 20, 2015 9:09 pm

I updated the HOV "update" box to the following:

{{Mbox|text=These guidelines have been updated {{as of|October 2014}} to prepare for the upcoming HOV features. The old method was to map these lanes as Parking Lot Roads. This new method below should be used when mapping new lanes. There is no rush to redo existing lanes to make them compliant; do so only if you are working on them anyway, or are doing a general refresh in the area.}}

I primarily made the language more direct. Dif: https://wiki.waze.com/wiki/index.php?ti ... ldid=83459

Also, two ideas for additional revisions:

1) I was reminded about the revamp I proposed for the HOV page about six months (I went on break in middle of the conversation). Consensus has shifted since I wrote it, so I'm not considering using the content in it. However, I would still like to consider the format, using a table to show the major variations and how to approach them (reversible, part time HOV restrictions, separate exit/entrance systems, etc.). Thoughts?

2) Do we ever need to set guidance to prevent users from wandering into an HOV lane? This came up recently, with some differences of opinion. Either way, consider adding guidance (yes, no, or conditional).
qwaletee
US Waze Champs
US Waze Champs
 
Posts: 2919
Joined: Wed Feb 13, 2013 1:42 am
Location: NYC Metro - Active throughout NE^2 (Northeast & New England)
Has thanked: 231 times
Been thanked: 1128 times

Re: [Update] Partial restrictions (time and vehicle type)

Postby voludu2 » Tue Feb 03, 2015 5:33 am

PesachZ wrote:I have an overhaul of the closures page in the works BTW

That sounds good, too. Things change so fast.
voludu2
Map Editor - Level 5
Map Editor - Level 5
 
Posts: 2448
Joined: Thu Jul 24, 2014 12:33 pm
Location: Chester County, Pennsylvania
Has thanked: 511 times
Been thanked: 767 times

Re: [Update] Partial restrictions (time and vehicle type)

Postby PesachZ » Tue Feb 03, 2015 5:30 am

voludu2 wrote:I fixed that reference. I'm took out the bit about "some short term closures" rather than change it to a reference to construction closures -- ther really is no definitive information to be found about partial restrictions for constructio related closures, and the user winds up in the article I construction, which seems to need a makeover, and then back to partial restrictions.

The truth is we currently use partial restrictions whenever we fear the stripey beta-WME closures falling off, but that bug and how we mitigate that risk is not currently covered in closures, which is where it probably should be covered, not as one of the primary reasons for using partial restrictions.

Partial restriction can also be used in the process of connecting up new construction, but that could probably better be described in the article on construction, as this one seems mostly to be about the mechanics of partial restrictions, not about the careful process of bringing new freeway segments online just in time.

That's my thinking, anyway.

I have an overhaul of the closures page in the works BTW

Sent using Tapatalk for Android 4.4.2
PesachZ
Wiki Master
Wiki Master
 
Posts: 4444
Joined: Mon Jul 01, 2013 12:51 am
Location: NY, USA (also NJ sometimes) {GC} {ARC}
Has thanked: 1993 times
Been thanked: 2270 times

Re: [Update] Partial restrictions (time and vehicle type)

Postby voludu2 » Tue Feb 03, 2015 5:15 am

I fixed that reference. I'm took out the bit about "some short term closures" rather than change it to a reference to construction closures -- ther really is no definitive information to be found about partial restrictions for constructio related closures, and the user winds up in the article I construction, which seems to need a makeover, and then back to partial restrictions.

The truth is we currently use partial restrictions whenever we fear the stripey beta-WME closures falling off, but that bug and how we mitigate that risk is not currently covered in closures, which is where it probably should be covered, not as one of the primary reasons for using partial restrictions.

Partial restriction can also be used in the process of connecting up new construction, but that could probably better be described in the article on construction, as this one seems mostly to be about the mechanics of partial restrictions, not about the careful process of bringing new freeway segments online just in time.

That's my thinking, anyway.
voludu2
Map Editor - Level 5
Map Editor - Level 5
 
Posts: 2448
Joined: Thu Jul 24, 2014 12:33 pm
Location: Chester County, Pennsylvania
Has thanked: 511 times
Been thanked: 767 times

Re: [Update] Partial restrictions (time and vehicle type)

Postby PesachZ » Mon Feb 02, 2015 8:35 pm

voludu2 wrote:I cut down on repetition in the lede and the next paragraph, increased the number of outlinks, and eliminated the contradiction. I gave advice on when to consult closures, but did not include all the closures detail in this article. Probably the overview section could use some pruning as well. My eventual goal is to simplify the language, provide enough details to help make good choices, but make the whole thing less wordy and less complicated.

You linked construction related closures to the client manual [[How to report]] instead of the [[Road closures]] page I mentioned above. I would also change the text from recommending using partial restrictions for "short term" construction. It is likely not the best option for short term construction due to tile delays etc. Instead I would change that to reference "some construction" and as I suggested above link to the road closures page for more detailed info.

Sent using Tapatalk for Android 4.4.2
PesachZ
Wiki Master
Wiki Master
 
Posts: 4444
Joined: Mon Jul 01, 2013 12:51 am
Location: NY, USA (also NJ sometimes) {GC} {ARC}
Has thanked: 1993 times
Been thanked: 2270 times

Re: [Update] Partial restrictions (time and vehicle type)

Postby voludu2 » Mon Feb 02, 2015 5:56 pm

I cut down on repetition in the lede and the next paragraph, increased the number of outlinks, and eliminated the contradiction. I gave advice on when to consult closures, but did not include all the closures detail in this article. Probably the overview section could use some pruning as well. My eventual goal is to simplify the language, provide enough details to help make good choices, but make the whole thing less wordy and less complicated.
voludu2
Map Editor - Level 5
Map Editor - Level 5
 
Posts: 2448
Joined: Thu Jul 24, 2014 12:33 pm
Location: Chester County, Pennsylvania
Has thanked: 511 times
Been thanked: 767 times

Re: [Update] Partial restrictions (time and vehicle type)

Postby PesachZ » Mon Feb 02, 2015 4:04 pm

voludu2 wrote:This is a very quick and simple change. Are there any objections to this change or the one I proposed above (which was requested many many pages back)?

No objections here, but I would link to the Road closure page.

Suggested replacement wrote:short term construction (in some situations Partial Restrictions may be appropriate. ''Please see the [[Road closures|Road Closures Page]] for more info on all the ways to handle construction.'')


Sent using Tapatalk for Android 4.4.2
PesachZ
Wiki Master
Wiki Master
 
Posts: 4444
Joined: Mon Jul 01, 2013 12:51 am
Location: NY, USA (also NJ sometimes) {GC} {ARC}
Has thanked: 1993 times
Been thanked: 2270 times

Re: [Update] Partial restrictions (time and vehicle type)

Postby voludu2 » Mon Feb 02, 2015 12:16 pm

This is a very quick and simple change. Are there any objections to this change or the one I proposed above (which was requested many many pages back)?
voludu2
Map Editor - Level 5
Map Editor - Level 5
 
Posts: 2448
Joined: Thu Jul 24, 2014 12:33 pm
Location: Chester County, Pennsylvania
Has thanked: 511 times
Been thanked: 767 times

Re: [Update] Partial restrictions (time and vehicle type)

Postby bz2012 » Sun Feb 01, 2015 11:42 am

I note a conflict between
short term construction (long term closures should use disconnected roads, though time restrictions may be used to synchronize the start or end of the closure period)

and
Disconnect road segments - Road segments should only be physically disconnected if the road is no longer intended to connect or is being permanently removed. While In the past, this method was used for longer term construction projects, the Road Closure feature should now be used.

Revision appears to be needed to resolve the conflict.

It appears to me that the first paragraph, which is very close to the beginning of the wiki, should be revised. I suggest it be revised to read simply
short term construction (see Disconnect road segments below, for permanent closure situations)
bz2012
Map Raider
Map Raider
 
Posts: 1497
Joined: Wed Nov 23, 2011 4:32 pm
Location: Baton Rouge, La
Has thanked: 1309 times
Been thanked: 280 times

Re: [Update] Partial restrictions (time and vehicle type)

Postby voludu2 » Fri Jan 30, 2015 1:42 pm

When this topic was started, the proposal was to remove some redundancy between the lede and overview. This has still not been done.
https://www.waze.com/forum/viewtopic.ph ... 95#p851053

I can do that. I propose to leave the information, meanings, guidance, etc, completely untouched in the process for simplicity. Does this sound OK?
voludu2
Map Editor - Level 5
Map Editor - Level 5
 
Posts: 2448
Joined: Thu Jul 24, 2014 12:33 pm
Location: Chester County, Pennsylvania
Has thanked: 511 times
Been thanked: 767 times

PreviousNext

Return to Wiki Updates and Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users

cron