Sat Jan 16, 2016 10:17 pm
Wed Jan 20, 2016 6:55 pm
PesachZ wrote:Should be updated to say:To be considered as a possible detour there must be a Freeway / Highway segment of the same 'Road Type Group', which share any name, both before and after a series of segments (more than one) which contain a name-discontinuity, and are in a different 'Road Type Group'.
Wed Jan 20, 2016 7:49 pm
CBenson wrote:Would this be correct?
https://wiki.waze.com/wiki/User:CBenson ... Mechanisms
CBenson's draft wiki article wrote:If the ramp does not also carry a simple alternate name of "I-1234", then there is a discontinuity of the highway name between the concurrency and the continuation highway. If there are two ramp segments like this, it will trigger Big Detour Prevention unexpectedly, and Waze will create an unneeded penalty for continuing on I-1234.
Wed Jan 20, 2016 9:32 pm
Fri Jan 18, 2019 2:35 am
sketch wrote:No prevention method is 100% effective. Condoms break, crimes still happen, and automobile engines still die no matter how diligent you are about changing the oil.
Thu Jan 21, 2016 7:13 pm
Thu Jan 21, 2016 8:22 pm
PesachZ wrote:CBenson wrote:I don't know. I don't think its good practice to name cross streets between a divided highway with the name of the highway in order ensure compliance with a shifting BDP implementation.
We wouldn't have to since cross streets between the divided highway are only one segment long and therefore wouldn't meet penalty criteria as a possible detour regardless of name or type.
Edit: under your criteria section you could clarify this to make it stand out more.A "possible detour" is a series of segments (more than one) in the middle of a route which meet the minimum criteria to trigger an evaluation.
Sent from Android using Tapatalk
Fri Jan 22, 2016 1:13 am
Fri Jan 22, 2016 4:46 pm
Maybe in the US, but not in Mexico.sketch wrote:But, regardless, at the very least, cardinals should be used on every freeway and expressway
Mon Jan 04, 2016 5:26 pm