sketch wrote:

PesachZ wrote:

voludu2 wrote:Yes. We are proposing something considerably shorter than that page, which starts with a concise statement of the rules for inheritance, and then gives a small number of illustrative application/examples. Extended commentary and interpretation could go in another book.

The extended commentary represents useful knowledge which should be documented somewhere so other interested user could learn if they wanted to get more advanced and not have to jumbo through the same hoops we did. Which other book would you recommend they be put in?

I was thinking on the walk to class that maybe the Talk pages would be a good place for advanced information like this, like, just in general.

Unfortunately with the current setup of our wiki, I don't think anyone would ever find it there. nobody checks the talk page

Sent using Tapatalk for Android 4.4.2

Maybe advanced information should go into subpages with a special category (Advanced editing information)

Sent using Tapatalk for Android 4.4.2

sketch wrote:

qwaletee wrote:Basic info should go in the lede. For moderately complex topics, taht may be enough, or there may need to be a first titled section for "The Basics."

For very complex topics, we may have to split between a basics article and an advanced article, or multiple advanced articles.

I don't really see a difficulty here.

This is basically what I'm talking about. Except that using multiple articles seems kind of a pain, and I think using Talk pages as sort of a "legislative history" is a good idea. No, no one looks at them now, but what is the difference between a link in the main article saying "For advanced guidance, go to [Unnamed roads/Advanced]" and "For advanced guidance, go to [Talk:Unnamed roads]"?

One big difference is a regular search of the wiki won't pick up content in the talk space.

Sent using Tapatalk for Android 4.4.2

I think we've waited long enough to publish this page.

I'd like to thank Moweez and Voludu2 for working to simplify the language, and Qwaletee for making it more relevant with examples.

We ha d a discussion with wiki masters from several countries, and have determined amongst ourselves that the most intuitive, yet easily translatable & understandable title for a global audience is: "Navigation instructions for unnamed segments".

I have copied the text changes from Moweez into a new user page in my user space and tweaked it further.

I feel this page is ready to be published. If you have any comments or critiques to prevent it from being published in its current form please reply below. Otherwise if you support this page in its current form please thumbs up or reply below as well.

The destination for this page in its entirety will be Road names/Navigation instructions for unnamed segments

A small portion of the page will be transcluded into a new section at the bottom of the Road types and names page, and the Road names/USA page.

When Waze gives navigation instructions to "turn", "exit", or "keep" onto an unnamed segment, it will look for a name it can use. If there is a named segment further along your route, it will use (inherit) that name in the instruction.

This always works for Freeways and Ramps.

As of January 2015, on all other road types (any road type which is not Freeways or Ramps), this feature only works if:

1. The combined length of the consecutive unnamed segments is shorter than 400 meters (1,312 feet),
   AND
2. There are 3 or less unnamed segments in a row.

If the consecutive unnamed segments measured together are longer than 400 m (1,312 ft), or if there are 4 or more unnamed segments in a row, Waze will NOT show or speak a name in the instructions.

For a more detailed explanation, and usage examples, please see the Navigation instructions for unnamed segments page.

To see a sample of the Road types and names page with this section included, look at this sample revision page in my user space.

On the Road Names/USA page I would add the same section under section 1.6 on exit ramps, above the current section 1.7 on New streets.

qwaletee wrote:It seems in the interest of simplification that a lot of details have been dropped. I'm not comfortable with that. There were also some unanswered questions.

Would you be willing to lost below which details you feel still bring on this page, and are missing below.

We can also list separately details which are missing, but would be better suited on other pages.

The primary purpose of this page is to be transcluded into the road names pages as a section.

Sent using Tapatalk for Android 4.4.2

qwaletee wrote:Offhand, here are some details that are missing or not made as clear as they could be:

1) Aligns with route, so other segments at the same junction are not relevant

2) Only affects announced/displayed name in instructions, does not affect naming of the segment itself

3) Unintended consequences of using an unnamed segment for a real unnamed road

4) Reference to wayfinders/BC, as you have mentioned

Thank you those details can and should be present, I'll try to work then in.

I have made some changes, please review:

• Added a hatnote to reference both the Best Continuation, and Wayfinder articles.
• Underlined the text "further along your route" and added an italic sentence emphasizing other segments connected but not along route are irelevant
• Added a section briefly explaining the unintended side effects, and a note to get advice from senior editors when this situation arises.

Does this address the concerns for the page?
Is this page now ready for publishing?
Do these new edits need to be simplified?

Not relevant to the content: But I modified the structure of the page to use "information nuggets" on individual subpages, which can be combined or transclude as need / wanted others.

Sent using Tapatalk for Android 4.4.2

voludu2 wrote:I agree with Moweez on keeping the simple page simple.
Also
* Add illustrations to the simple page. A picture is worth 1000 words
* Do not use "inheritance". It has meaning in this context to those familiar with the object model in software design, but is confusing and unfortunately funereal to most others. Also, the segment in question does not inherit the name from a parent object. The name is passed to the turn instruction, which is not an example of object inheritance.

The name is inherited to the turn prompt. While it may not be the common meaning globally it is easily understood in context as the page title and text explain it well. Do you have a better replacement term to use?

Sent using Tapatalk for Android 4.4.2

sketch wrote:"Routing instructions onto unnamed segments"?

We have a good global page title already. (esachZ/Navigation_instructions_for_unnamed_segments]Navigation instructions for unnamed segments)

We need a one word term to be used in conversation describing the behavior.
"If you make that AGC unnamed it will *inherit* the name from the next segment on the route."
We are looking for a term to replace the word inherit in the above sentence.



Sent using Tapatalk for Android 4.4.2