sketch wrote:Well, if

I usually stop reading there, sorry.

So where did we end up in this (or did it get carried to another thread?)?

For what it's worth, I think adding landmarks makes for cluttered maps and is a kludge to work around shortcomings of the waze backend. It's not sustainable and they'll need to fix the backend at some point (at which point the maps are littered with useless landmarks).

While we're on subject, I'd like to address the parking lot road navigation problem as well.

When you're driving around a bunch of unnamed parking lot roads, the client will grab the name of the next names road and repeat it with each instruction. Great for ramps, confusing and annoying for shopping centers.

We have two options, as I see it, both of which would need some degree of programmer intervention.

Option 1: Remove the "next named road" function for parking lot road type segments.

Reprogramming the client to say just "Turn left" or "Turn right" when navigating through unnamed parking lot roads would fix the problem with no editor intervention. This would also arguably provide clearer instructions.

The problem is that we are at the mercy of the programmers here. Another potential problem is if somehow the programmers get it wrong, disabling the next-name finder on more than just parking lot roads. This would be a huge problem. Ramps and at-grade connectors would not work at all. And that's if we get the programmers to do it at all.

Option 2: Start giving parking lot roads generic names and exclude them from search.

Changing editor policy to require the inclusion of generic names for parking lots would be an easy fix that would require little to no programmer intervention. It would give instructions that are arguably even more clear than option 1: "Take a right at Parking Lot", for example.

Drawbacks are that we'd have to spend a lot of time editing, and we'd have to come up with a set of acceptable generic names and guidelines to go with them. Also, we'd have a few extraneous search results, maybe, but considering that Jason and I have hundreds of segments called "U turn" or "U-Turn" around here, it seems like it wouldn't be that big a problem:

http://img.tapatalk.com/d/13/06/16/y4yqyba8.jpg

---

I don't know which I prefer, but I'm leaning toward the latter. What do you think?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk 2

Well, if they ever finally make them thin and light on the client, it should be trivial to make them not display names at the same time.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk 2

Staff expressed their desire at this year's WazeMeet, if I am not mistaken, to make parking lots properly navigable. Something like Waze should be able, in the future, where to park and exactly how to get there.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk 2

OK, so this has been something of interest to me for sometime, parking lot landmark vs parking lot road segments. It seems the Waze community is split on this, and although I prefer the parking lot landmark tool, it seems the Waze Wiki would suggest otherwise.

https://wiki.waze.com/wiki/Parking_lot_ ... arking_Lot

I found this when trying to determine whether a parking lot landmark should be connected to a road segment or stand alone. This seems to suggest not connecting it to the road. I guess I am looking for a bit more guidance and I think this is the most appropriate thread I can hang this on. Please let me know your thoughts.

I found this when trying to determine whether a parking lot landmark should be connected to a road segment or stand alone. This seems to suggest not connecting it to the road.

To better clarify, the above statement was regarding the Parking lot Landmark and not snapping the landmark to the main road grid.

The question still remains, when dealing with small, non-destination point parking lots, what is preferred, segments or landmarks. Considering the majority of Waze Automated Errors are regarding missing road segments are related to people cutting through smalll corner lots, should these small lots be blocked out as landmarks or road segments?

Thanks for all the great feedback. I agree, generally nothing needs to be done, expect when automated errors suggests missing segments. Appreciate it everyone!

Parking lot segments have a higher routing penalty, landmarks do not. Both will suppress automatic traffic alerts.

Hi all !
Yes I'm a waze newbie and my first map edition try is actually on a parking lot, so I guess, discovering the subject posts, that they are many reasons for you to laugh at me !!!

The parking lot area at my work place is quite big, and as I used the possibility to record where I parked, I was quite pissed of being mapped on the nearest road instead of seing my position getting closer to my recorded position in the parking lot (when using waze on my android mobile and walking to my car).
Before I tried (yesterday) for the first time to suggest updates through waze.com/editor, I previously tried to use "building a new road" in the "map problem reports" on my mobile app. These new roads were visible some days on the mobile map, but then disappeared. Now that my changes seem to have been accepted on waze.com/editor, these new parking lot roads are still invisible on my mobile map :S
I'm sure there's something I missed in the intention, so please correct me !

Thomas
Android Waze 3.7.2.0