Wiki page suggestion: Landmarks

Moderator: Unholy

Re: Wiki page suggestion: Landmarks

Postby Daknife » Fri Jan 11, 2013 2:10 am

AndyPoms wrote:You're correct, there are certainly some changes that have to be made to the CT list to make it National Friendly and part of what I'm working on proposing to the champs first will include a lot of language similar to "Please see local Wiki Pages / local Area Managers for information on what is considered 'Major' and mapped for this category in your area". We will still need local guidelines/specifics.

Religious Sites: Did you see my post above that puts some info about the discussion we had in CT? The one where we decided to landmark "Major" sites & quickly decided that CT had none, so we moved on, but the "Major" discussion is still valid. That's something that would be included the National Guidelines. The basic idea was if the religious site was one which someone would make a pilgrimage to/visit as a tourist attraction, it should probably be mapped - but like I said, we quickly decided that CT doesn't have any (well, since the Holy Land park closed).

Water: I posted above that we were working on figuring out what was there & what wasn't in CT. We did the original work on the guidelines for CT when there were issues with the water layer & we didn't want to mess with it. I would certainly agree (as would the other CT users) that if it's not on the water layer, and is significant it should probably be mapped - HOWEVER, we need to talk to Waze about this as they may be adding other water bodies (they are mostly working on coastlines now) and un-submerging roads.

Cemeteries: Yes, a lot were basemapped, not all were. What value do the add? In CT, we're not going around deleting them, but we aren't adding them either.

Military Bases: There will be exceptions to every guideline as we can't write anything that is iron clad because we need flexibility. You mention Hill AFB, and it's landmarked so people don't go through the base, but 1) isn't there a fence around the entire base? 2) aren't all the roads on base a mix of "Private" and "Parking Lot" (preventing Waze from routing through the base already)? At Naval Submarine Base New London we have to keep renaming the on-base gas station to "NEX Fueling (NO PUBLIC ACCESS)" as we don't want to get complaints about unauthorized people trying to go there from off base. We've tried to reach out to a few of the on-base users (based on their editing) to work more on their map (including landmarks), but they haven't responded. Overlapping landmarks causes issues which is one of the bigger reasons we went with the city layer.

Fire Dept: In most places they are considered a "Safe Haven" and you can get emergency medical care there or if they are on a call there is a call box out front. Most maps mark these - It's worth it.

Police Dept: The City/Town name just adds unnecessary words to the map. In your example does the person being followed care if they are going to "Anytown Police Dept" or "Othertown Police Dept"? No, they just care they are going to a "Police Dept", any Police Dept. Anyway, if one were to search, they would use POI search, not landmarks. It's there to help people see it on the map.

Golf Courses: Private Courses will appear in POI Search or can buy advertising from Waze. This falls under the "Don't map individual businesses" guideline.

Stadiums: They just look cooler with the shape & the parking lot roads handle the jams & missing roads reports. It was something we played with before making this decision.

Interchanges: The issue is that larger, more complex interchanges would be very hard to build, label & control. The problem with "hacking" the city layer like that is that a report on the overpass will display as "Main St, <Exit #>" instead of the town where it is.

Other things of note, one does not have to attend a meetup to become a Champ. No one has said anything about locking the userbase out of the discussion, in fact I said the opposite several times.

Okay a couple points of First as to religious sites, you will soon have an LDS Temple in Hartford (you don't have to map it) ;) and members do make pilgrimage like trips to them if they don't live near one. In the US these trips are now mostly day trips because there are enough of our Temples, but many members still make an excursion of a trip. In other parts of the world members sacrifice and save greatly to be able to travel to a Temple just once in their lives. So while not on par by any means with Mecca or other similar sites, these are significant locations. Similarly in Utah we don't have a strong catholic presence but we do have one historical cathedral built about the same time as the Salt Lake City Temple and I made sure it was mapped as it is of importance historically as well as religiously.

Stadiums, okay I can buy the cooler shape argument, but when you map them to their shape that tells newbies to map other buildings to their shapes. Let's be consistent. If it's a large complex (building and parking lots) make it one large landmark just like malls, universities, and so on.

Golf Courses, what tripped me up I now see is the word Private. Most of our Golf courses are publicly owned, and it's not worth the effort to determine which is which, so I've just told my editors to mark em all as parks.

Fire Depts, When there is an insta-care clinic with actual medical personnel usually closer than a fire dept, I'd map those clinics before fire depts. Yes they are also the safe haven for abandoning children, but how common is that actually and a POI search will do just as well. I guess my real objection to it though comes from dealing with editors who wanted to landmark everything and trying to limit them. I just don't see the value in marking them. Yes I know most maps do but still have never seen the need for that either, other than it dates from when the town fire-hall would often double as the town hall or town meeting hall. And half the men in town were members of the volunteer FD force.

As to the Interchange "hack" no it doesn't affect reporting negatively. A report on the overpass will report as being in (if you look at the linked example) Manderfield Exit, Utah, not Manderfield Ut. Any reports on the neighboring roads won't give a city name in the report. And if there is a problem that points me right to the exit rather than the city. As I said before, this will only work in rural areas well away from any actual city. Another location I tried this has Just the exit number as the name. [urlhttps://www.waze.com/editor/?zoom=5&lat=38.07154&lon=-112.6882&layers=BFTFFTTTTTTTTTTTFTTTTFT]Exit 95, Utah[/url] Again I'm not set on this, I think it's clever, I think it works. It always shows up on the client whereas the landmarks do not. As with this one at the south side of Nephi, UT. I just verified that the landmark I placed there months ago does not show in the client in day or night mode, and thus the exit number does not show, which is what I think we really want them to show.

And to Jason, thanks for the info, my biggest frustration here, even more than being or at least feeling excluded from the discussion is the fact that while you guys have been debating this in secret, I've been battling for months with no set resource to point editors to and say "This is how it is to be done." There was a good discussion going, then it suddenly died it seemed to me that lacking anyone taking the initiative and editing the Wiki or saying "Okay it sounds like most people seem to agree with XXX" most editors seemed to just be going along with what had been said that wasn't immediately shot down. Give me (well I just created a Utah guideline page so it's not so important now) something to point new editors at and I'll be happy. Taking the discussion behind closed doors, with no statement to that effect and leaving me with nothing to point new editors at has caused great frustration. I finally had to get one editor banned for a bit as he simply wasn't responding to any effort to get him to communicate, and he stated that lacking any set wiki instructions, he was just trying to mark all the landmarks the drop-down list let him mark.
Image
AM in Utah; CM USA
Utah Forum: Utah Forum
Samsung Galaxy S4 running 4.4 KitKat on Sprint
Daknife
Waze Mentor
Waze Mentor
 
Posts: 1683
Joined: Sat Dec 24, 2011 11:03 pm
Location: Riverdale, Utah
Has thanked: 456 times
Been thanked: 227 times

Re: Wiki page suggestion: Landmarks

Postby jasonh300 » Fri Jan 11, 2013 2:24 am

daknife wrote:Taking the discussion behind closed doors, with no statement to that effect and leaving me with nothing to point new editors at has caused great frustration. I finally had to get one editor banned for a bit as he simply wasn't responding to any effort to get him to communicate, and he stated that lacking any set wiki instructions, he was just trying to mark all the landmarks the drop-down list let him mark.


Just keep in mind that a statement *was* made that the discussion would be taken behind closed doors...that's how you know about it. That hasn't actually happened yet. As of right now, the discussion has only taken place here aside from a couple of PMs I exchanged with Andy discussing how to handle it.

The process of the Champs discussion shouldn't take very long. Whichever Champs want to put in their 2¢ will do so within a day or two...unless there's some kind of serious disagreement, which I doubt will be the case.

Give AndyPoms a few days to compile everything...that's a pretty big job, and he has a regular full time job to, so it isn't going to happen instantly. But I think the original statement of how long this process is going to take was over-estimated. If Andy can get all the data together, I think we should be able to get this finalized and into the Wiki in a week or so.

Andy, if you need help to speed up the process, just let me know.
Image
New Orleans, Louisiana, USA
South-Central Regional Coordinator
(LA/MS/AR...contact karlcr9911 for TX/OK related issues)
U.S. Champ, Global Champ
Waze FAQ ... Best Map Editing Practice
Ask me about Louisiana Editors Chat in Google Hangouts!
jasonh300
Waze Global Champs
Waze Global Champs
 
Posts: 7546
Joined: Fri Oct 28, 2011 4:26 pm
Location: New Orleans, LA, USA
Has thanked: 398 times
Been thanked: 965 times

Re: Wiki page suggestion: Landmarks

Postby Daknife » Fri Jan 11, 2013 2:55 am

Okay, Jason but that's not what I was told. I was told that the discussion "had" been moved to the Champs, as in it was ongoing there without the rest of us having any knowledge of it or input into it. What should have been said was something to the effect of, "Good point Dakife, this has kind of dropped off the radar, we'll move all that has been said to the champs and finalize it over the next few days, and then we'll get the wiki updated."
Image
AM in Utah; CM USA
Utah Forum: Utah Forum
Samsung Galaxy S4 running 4.4 KitKat on Sprint
Daknife
Waze Mentor
Waze Mentor
 
Posts: 1683
Joined: Sat Dec 24, 2011 11:03 pm
Location: Riverdale, Utah
Has thanked: 456 times
Been thanked: 227 times

Re: Wiki page suggestion: Landmarks

Postby DrockMiller » Fri Jan 11, 2013 6:12 pm

What about marking Camp Sites as parks similar to what is done for beaches? In Illinois at least many camp sites are a part of State/National parks, but there are some privately run camp sites. There are private beaches as well that are marked as parks so I think camp sites and parks are pretty analogous.
DrockMiller
Area Manager
Area Manager
 
Posts: 72
Joined: Mon Jul 23, 2012 11:21 pm
Location: Naperville, IL
Has thanked: 127 times
Been thanked: 11 times

Re: Wiki page suggestion: Landmarks

Postby KB_Steveo » Fri Jan 11, 2013 9:25 pm

AndyPoms wrote:
daknife wrote:Similarly in this thread it was mentioned and not contested (and thus accepted in my understanding) that bodies of water that are common driver navigation landmarks and are NOT found in the water layer are allowed. The river running the length of the Salt Lake Valley, the Jordan River, is not in the water layer for most of it's length so I've just authorized the editor who has been begging to add it, to do so.
That is something we're still looking into - we're currently having issues figuring out what's in the water layer and what's not. We wanted to get the basics out first (so we had something to point users towards) and would continue working on these things later...

Out of curiosity, what's the major issue with mapping water bodies? Redundancy? Server load?
Also, there was an editor out by me who landmarked some water just so the name had the potential to show up on the client. (ex. Mansur Bay, Ricker Bay, Lake Winnebago) What are the thoughts on that?

Also for PLots, wouldn't you want to map parking garages with public access, whether paid or unpaid, as a parking lot?
ImageImageImage
WI State Manager
NE Wisconsin Area Manager (Green Bay / Appleton / Sturgeon Bay)
Wisconsin mapping resources curator
KB_Steveo
State Manager
State Manager
 
Posts: 315
Joined: Wed Jan 25, 2012 5:26 pm
Location: Wisconsin
Has thanked: 53 times
Been thanked: 27 times

Re: Wiki page suggestion: Landmarks

Postby AndyPoms » Fri Jan 11, 2013 10:29 pm

sbelekevich wrote:Out of curiosity, what's the major issue with mapping water bodies? Redundancy? Server load?
Also, there was an editor out by me who landmarked some water just so the name had the potential to show up on the client. (ex. Mansur Bay, Ricker Bay, Lake Winnebago) What are the thoughts on that?
The water layer already contains names and they display in the client. Waze is also currently working on the water layer (starting with the coast lines) and we don't want to interfere with that work. The national language will reflect that and leave the door open to reevaluate once Waze completes this work.

sbelekevich wrote:Also for PLots, wouldn't you want to map parking garages with public access, whether paid or unpaid, as a parking lot?
As explained in the CT guidelines, those lots are covered by both POI serach and the new |P| icon when approaching your destination (which we have determined comes from FourSquare).
Image
Waze Champ & Forum Moderator
USA Country Manager
Senior Area Manager: State of Connecticut
Wiki: Editing | Best Practices | FAQ
AndyPoms
Waze Global Champs
Waze Global Champs
 
Posts: 7067
Joined: Tue Dec 27, 2011 1:34 pm
Location: Hartford, CT
Has thanked: 127 times
Been thanked: 1284 times

Re: Re: Wiki page suggestion: Landmarks

Postby skbun » Sat Jan 12, 2013 3:10 am

AndyPoms wrote:The water layer already contains names and they display in the client. Waze is also currently working on the water layer (starting with the coast lines) and we don't want to interfere with that work. The national language will reflect that and leave the door open to reevaluate once Waze completes this work.


Just for the record, the water itself shows in the client, but names don't unless editors added water objects. Have a look yourself. They DO show in Livemap, but I've never seen anything suggesting they are the 'same layer'. Are we sure about this?

Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2
Image

AM in SW Shasta, NW Tehama, Central Trinity Counties, CA; Mt Rainier Nat'l Park, WA
skbun
 
Posts: 425
Joined: Sun May 06, 2012 12:27 am
Location: Seattle/Tacoma WA
Has thanked: 27 times
Been thanked: 48 times

Re: Wiki page suggestion: Landmarks

Postby skbun » Sat Jan 12, 2013 8:59 am

AndyPoms wrote:Water: I posted above that we were working on figuring out what was there & what wasn't in CT. We did the original work on the guidelines for CT when there were issues with the water layer & we didn't want to mess with it. I would certainly agree (as would the other CT users) that if it's not on the water layer, and is significant it should probably be mapped - HOWEVER, we need to talk to Waze about this as they may be adding other water bodies (they are mostly working on coastlines now) and un-submerging roads.


If I had to guess, I'd say that Waze's water data came from the dataset you can see at http://viewer.nationalmap.gov/viewer/nhd.html?p=nhd .

We can see two different generated static vector images generated from this data on the Livemap and on the client...

I'd guess that the one on the Livemap got slightly higher granularity when generated, say...to make sure that water objects that are 75x75ft or larger show up on the map, in general - and it has names associated with the objects that are exactly the same as they appear in the NHD data. (E.g. 'Lk Fenwick' at http://www.waze.com/livemap/?zoom=15&la ... yers=BTTTT ). The one in the Waze client is slightly LESS granular...its accuracy is to objects about 100x100ft, and to the best of my knowledge, those names were NOT imported or if they were, they're not visible. Stuff that's smaller overall, like small rivers or creeks, don't show up at all by either standard even though they are present and named in the NHD.

So I guess with respect to water layers I would have two questions for the folks generating the water tiles:

1. Can we expect that the granularity will remain the same in the future - so if we want say, creeks that we can't see in the client or Livemap today, that we SHOULD add them?
2. We can't see names of objects on the water layer in the client, imported as-is from NHD, or otherwise. Should we be expecting to but can't? (The whole reason I was adding larger bodies of water in WME was for better shoreline accuracy, and so a name of a water body DID show up as one travels.)
Image

AM in SW Shasta, NW Tehama, Central Trinity Counties, CA; Mt Rainier Nat'l Park, WA
skbun
 
Posts: 425
Joined: Sun May 06, 2012 12:27 am
Location: Seattle/Tacoma WA
Has thanked: 27 times
Been thanked: 48 times

Re: Re: Wiki page suggestion: Landmarks

Postby AndyPoms » Sat Jan 12, 2013 8:13 pm

skbun wrote:Just for the record, the water itself shows in the client, but names don't unless editors added water objects. Have a look yourself. They DO show in Livemap, but I've never seen anything suggesting they are the 'same layer'. Are we sure about this?
I've seen the names of both the Connecticut River and Wethersfield Cove appear on the map - neither of them have had landmarks in the last year.

skbun wrote:If I had to guess, I'd say that Waze's water data came from the dataset you can see at http://viewer.nationalmap.gov/viewer/nhd.html?p=nhd .
Waze's water data came from the US TIGER maps (just like the roads did).

skbun wrote:We can see two different generated static vector images generated from this data on the Livemap and on the client...

I'd guess that the one on the Livemap got slightly higher granularity when generated, say...to make sure that water objects that are 75x75ft or larger show up on the map, in general - and it has names associated with the objects that are exactly the same as they appear in the NHD data. (E.g. 'Lk Fenwick' at http://www.waze.com/livemap/?zoom=15&la ... yers=BTTTT ). The one in the Waze client is slightly LESS granular...its accuracy is to objects about 100x100ft, and to the best of my knowledge, those names were NOT imported or if they were, they're not visible. Stuff that's smaller overall, like small rivers or creeks, don't show up at all by either standard even though they are present and named in the NHD.
The livemap hasn't been visually updated in quite a while (well before Waze started working on the water layer), so we can't trust that as a reference source.

Like I said, let's let the Waze staff finish their water layer work and THEN we can discuss what to do about the water layer and water landmarks.
Image
Waze Champ & Forum Moderator
USA Country Manager
Senior Area Manager: State of Connecticut
Wiki: Editing | Best Practices | FAQ
AndyPoms
Waze Global Champs
Waze Global Champs
 
Posts: 7067
Joined: Tue Dec 27, 2011 1:34 pm
Location: Hartford, CT
Has thanked: 127 times
Been thanked: 1284 times

Re: Wiki page suggestion: Landmarks

Postby antigerme » Thu Jan 17, 2013 3:33 pm

Landmark not suppress traffic jams, is a myth.
Image AM - Salvador/L. de Freitas
Waze Blog/Facebook/G+
Aprenda em: Manual do usuário | Manual de edição | Quiz
Site oficial para sugestões: Waze Client, Website e Editor
* não me responsabilizo por danos em sua vista
antigerme
Coordinators
Coordinators
 
Posts: 7833
Joined: Sat Jun 11, 2011 8:14 pm
Location: Salvador, Brazil
Has thanked: 2801 times
Been thanked: 7000 times

PreviousNext

Return to Wiki Updates and Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: FzNk