Get a sneak peek at whats next for Permanent Hazards on our April 7th Office Hours!
Post by Fredo-p
AlanOfTheBerg wrote:Does this "voting" on my proposed change need to be done differently? So far, there are only 6 votes total, 3 in support, and 3 against.
Well, it is a wiki. So changes can be reverted. I'm sure making the changes won't cause problems. Maybe a nice little note can be added to remind editors that this isn't a major issue and can be gradually implemented over time.

Sent from my DROID4 using Tapatalk
Fredo-p
Posts: 2008
Has thanked: 240 times
Been thanked: 522 times
Send a message

Arizona Wiki | @Waze_Arizona Twitter
Verizon Samsung Galaxy S8+

Post by Fredo-p
AlanOfTheBerg wrote:Does this "voting" on my proposed change need to be done differently? So far, there are only 6 votes total, 3 in support, and 3 against.
Well, it is a wiki, so changes can be reverted. I'm sure making the changes won't cause problems. Maybe a nice little note can be added to remind editors that this isn't a major issue and can be gradually implemented over time.

Sent from my DROID4 using Tapatalk
Fredo-p
Posts: 2008
Has thanked: 240 times
Been thanked: 522 times
Send a message

Arizona Wiki | @Waze_Arizona Twitter
Verizon Samsung Galaxy S8+

Post by Fredo-p
DwarfLord wrote:
AlanOfTheBerg wrote:All railroad segments in the US should now be set to Lock level 2.
Shall 2 be the number of the locking, and the number of the locking shall be 2? Or mayest thou then proceed to 3, 4, or 5, depending? :D

(EDIT: Serious question actually, but on reflection I am guessing the intent is to allow Rank 2 editors to help accomplish the junctioning and we will tolerate the garden-variety risks of deletion etc. that are present with any segment locked at 2. Is that correct?)
Why is it when I read this I instantly think of a Holy Grenade?[emoji3]

Sent from my DROID4 using Tapatalk
Fredo-p
Posts: 2008
Has thanked: 240 times
Been thanked: 522 times
Send a message

Arizona Wiki | @Waze_Arizona Twitter
Verizon Samsung Galaxy S8+

Post by Fredo-p
nzahn1 wrote:Did we ever resolve the issue of mapping sub-terranean railroads. Specifically thinking of ones that travel under cities.

Haven't found a good reason to have them on the map.
I see no reason to map anything underground unless it's a road that goes through a tunnel. It serves no purpose.
Fredo-p
Posts: 2008
Has thanked: 240 times
Been thanked: 522 times
Send a message

Arizona Wiki | @Waze_Arizona Twitter
Verizon Samsung Galaxy S8+

Post by Fredo-p
dmcrandall wrote: Every Metro rail line underneath Boston is mapped.
Why......Just....why? It's underground. What purpose does that serve?
Fredo-p
Posts: 2008
Has thanked: 240 times
Been thanked: 522 times
Send a message

Arizona Wiki | @Waze_Arizona Twitter
Verizon Samsung Galaxy S8+

Post by Fredo-p
Keep in mind we don't want to cause sensory/information overload. Display too much and the map becomes confusing and distracting. Have to keep the balance between what to display and what not to display on the app. Now live map, that's a diff story.
Fredo-p
Posts: 2008
Has thanked: 240 times
Been thanked: 522 times
Send a message

Arizona Wiki | @Waze_Arizona Twitter
Verizon Samsung Galaxy S8+

Post by jondrush
I agree with banished, this proposed changed is far too premature to implement at this time. We don't know what we don't know yet.
jondrush
EmeritusChamps
EmeritusChamps
Posts: 2660
Has thanked: 73 times
Been thanked: 375 times
Send a message

Post by kentsmith9
Based on the discussion, I am good with Alan's Wiki changes. I also recommend we add a link to this thread onto the Talk/Discussion tab of that page for easy future reference if someone disagrees with the Wiki changes (or forgets why we made them).

I am not sure I saw this covered. Let's also be sure the Wiki wording is clear that this change from the prior recommendation is not something that must be done immediately, but can be changed over time.
kentsmith9
Waze Global Champs
Waze Global Champs
Posts: 5765
Has thanked: 816 times
Been thanked: 1156 times
Send a message

Post by kentsmith9
Just saw my first MP on a Junctioned RR. Waze had a driver locked onto the RR that ran parallel to the road next to it. The driver turned left across the RR and the MP claimed the driver was on the RR and turned left against the restricted turn.

I thought Waze would NOT route onto a RR or would not even assume you could be on a RR? Did I miss something somewhere?
kentsmith9
Waze Global Champs
Waze Global Champs
Posts: 5765
Has thanked: 816 times
Been thanked: 1156 times
Send a message

Post by kentsmith9
Except a RR cannot make a 90 degree turn. Maybe they can add something to the code to recognize a RR that changes from a continuation direction is bad data and should be tossed and not reported as a map problem. It is a waste of our valuable resource.
kentsmith9
Waze Global Champs
Waze Global Champs
Posts: 5765
Has thanked: 816 times
Been thanked: 1156 times
Send a message