New Page - Tunnels

Moderator: Unholy

Re: New Page - Tunnels

Postby WeeeZer14 » Mon Oct 29, 2012 12:11 am

I assume tunnels can fall into one of 3 categories:

1.) One single segment covers the entire tunnel and its entrances and exits.
2.) A tunnel that is made up of multiple segments but there is only one way in and out
3.) A tunnel with exits/entrances in the tunnel

Cases 2 and 3 are the ones where I _think_ we run into issues with Waze collecting data. Like I mentioned in discussions on and the wiki for dead ends, it seems that Waze needs to see a drive go through both junctions of a segment to record the data. So that may be difficult in these cases.

If the above assumptions are true, I wonder if we should recommend avoiding case number 2. For instance the tunnels between NY and NJ are two segments because there is a state line in the middle. Maybe these should be made into a single segment? I am not sure how much of an issue these tunnels are having since I haven't used them lately, especially at rush hour, but there has been at least forum post indicating something may be wacky with those tunnels detecting traffic.

We may want to mention that non-tunnels may ACT like tunnels -- canyons and sunken roadways for instance.
iPhone 5s (AT&T) • iOS 7.0.3 • Waze 3.7.6.0
Image
✰ Mega Driver ✰ Mega Mapper ✰ 1M Points ✰
Country Manager: USA • Regional Coordinator: USA South Atlantic (KY, TN, NC, SC)
Navigation/Routing ExpertForum Moderator
WeeeZer14
 
Posts: 3761
Joined: Sun Apr 11, 2010 3:27 pm
Location: Knoxville, TN, USA
Has thanked: 46 times
Been thanked: 316 times

Re: New Page - Tunnels

Postby sketch » Fri Feb 21, 2014 5:25 pm

kentsmith9 wrote:But before we go through all this, shouldn't we understand what Waze back end does with this information? If they assume a tunnel when below "ground" elevation, what is happening to our underpasses we have below ground?

Yeah, good point. I wasn't there, but from what I understand from the meeting notes, it's to help the merger process understand that there may be a gap in GPS points for a time. So maybe it's not so bad for underpasses either. And I assume anything that does have valid GPS points for the whole time won't trigger that particular merger function. But yes, we should get this info.
ALL US EDITORS READ: New USA road type guidance
assistant regional coordinator • south central region • usa
waze global champ • usa country manager • new orleans
2017 chevrolet ss sedan 6mt • slipstream blue metallic
Image Image
sketch
Waze Global Champs
Waze Global Champs
 
Posts: 6206
Joined: Sat Aug 08, 2009 6:13 pm
Location: New Orleans, LA
Has thanked: 1691 times
Been thanked: 2259 times

Re: New Page - Tunnels

Postby sketch » Thu Feb 20, 2014 6:47 am

I would imagine whatever Street View says is better than nothing, and nothing is exactly what we have for GPS data in tunnels. I use it sometimes to help in New Orleans, where big old trees can make some roads basically impossible to see from the air.

Regarding the elevation, I'm basically thinking "why not?" It certainly makes sense to have tunnels at a low but not railroad-low elevation—well; underwater tunnels, anyway, rather than tunnels through mountains and all.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk 2
ALL US EDITORS READ: New USA road type guidance
assistant regional coordinator • south central region • usa
waze global champ • usa country manager • new orleans
2017 chevrolet ss sedan 6mt • slipstream blue metallic
Image Image
sketch
Waze Global Champs
Waze Global Champs
 
Posts: 6206
Joined: Sat Aug 08, 2009 6:13 pm
Location: New Orleans, LA
Has thanked: 1691 times
Been thanked: 2259 times

Re: New Page - Tunnels

Postby sketch » Wed Feb 19, 2014 8:42 pm

2 things:

  1. Should we add a rule that all tunnels shall be set to negative elevations? All to -3 (unless tunnels cross underwater)?
  2. Should we add text explaining that Street View can be used to determine a curved tunnel's geometry, the location of ramps, etc.?

edit Just found this: https://www.waze.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=212&t=64030
ALL US EDITORS READ: New USA road type guidance
assistant regional coordinator • south central region • usa
waze global champ • usa country manager • new orleans
2017 chevrolet ss sedan 6mt • slipstream blue metallic
Image Image
sketch
Waze Global Champs
Waze Global Champs
 
Posts: 6206
Joined: Sat Aug 08, 2009 6:13 pm
Location: New Orleans, LA
Has thanked: 1691 times
Been thanked: 2259 times

Re: New Page - Tunnels

Postby qwaletee » Mon Dec 28, 2015 5:55 am

I'd be OK with calling that a tunnel. What's the downside?
US Champ / Country Manager | State Manager NY, NJ, PA, CT, MA, RI, VT, ME, NH | Northeast ARC | Mentor | Responding to Map Issues
qwaletee
US Waze Champs
US Waze Champs
 
Posts: 2924
Joined: Wed Feb 13, 2013 1:42 am
Location: NYC Metro - Active throughout NE^2 (Northeast & New England)
Has thanked: 231 times
Been thanked: 1128 times

Re: New Page - Tunnels

Postby martinchaney » Tue Nov 20, 2012 10:32 pm

There needs to be some way of marking segments as tunnels so Waze knows not to expect GPS reception in them. As it is, Waze is generating automated map errors because it thinks people are getting more directly from point A to point B and thinks there's a missing road.
martinchaney
 
Posts: 3
Joined: Tue Oct 09, 2012 10:46 pm
Has thanked: 0 time
Been thanked: 0 time

Re: New Page - Tunnels

Postby kentsmith9 » Thu Aug 14, 2014 5:36 pm

I posted what we have so far into the Wiki on https://wiki.waze.com/wiki/Tunnels.

I did not add anything on Places, so if someone is more up to speed on the general plan for them, please consider commenting here and then adding it directly to the page.
USA: Now Idaho; previously California (Northern, SF/SJ)

ImageImageImageImageImageImage
PLEASE READ: Waze Map Editor (Start Here) | Editing Quick-start | Best Practices | Junctions
kentsmith9
Waze Global Champs
Waze Global Champs
 
Posts: 5578
Joined: Mon Apr 23, 2012 3:33 pm
Location: Boise ID and SF/SJ Bay Area of Northern California
Has thanked: 1507 times
Been thanked: 1711 times

Re: New Page - Tunnels

Postby kentsmith9 » Mon Feb 24, 2014 11:54 pm

harling wrote:Please forgive my late re-entry into this discussion.
The main thing that distinguishes tunnels...

Lots of good thoughts in there, but I am not sure I saw a suggestion to change in our current page. :mrgreen:
USA: Now Idaho; previously California (Northern, SF/SJ)

ImageImageImageImageImageImage
PLEASE READ: Waze Map Editor (Start Here) | Editing Quick-start | Best Practices | Junctions
kentsmith9
Waze Global Champs
Waze Global Champs
 
Posts: 5578
Joined: Mon Apr 23, 2012 3:33 pm
Location: Boise ID and SF/SJ Bay Area of Northern California
Has thanked: 1507 times
Been thanked: 1711 times

Re: New Page - Tunnels

Postby kentsmith9 » Sat Feb 22, 2014 12:08 am

I am willing to second the proposal to recommend Tunnels be marked with something below "Ground" elevation even if it is just in case.

Note that we we building a message box template that we can place in sections that are providing information based more on speculation rather than known fact so we can more easily track where in the Wiki we say these things and then periodically come back and review/update/remove those comments. This would be a good example.
USA: Now Idaho; previously California (Northern, SF/SJ)

ImageImageImageImageImageImage
PLEASE READ: Waze Map Editor (Start Here) | Editing Quick-start | Best Practices | Junctions
kentsmith9
Waze Global Champs
Waze Global Champs
 
Posts: 5578
Joined: Mon Apr 23, 2012 3:33 pm
Location: Boise ID and SF/SJ Bay Area of Northern California
Has thanked: 1507 times
Been thanked: 1711 times

Re: New Page - Tunnels

Postby kentsmith9 » Fri Feb 21, 2014 4:54 pm

sketch wrote:I would imagine whatever Street View says is better than nothing, and nothing is exactly what we have for GPS data in tunnels. I use it sometimes to help in New Orleans, where big old trees can make some roads basically impossible to see from the air.

Nice. Had not considered that one either. Frankly I had no idea the street view was forcing the icon to the correct GPS location. I think there may be other things we can get from that. I think we should add that tip to nanoRep and the Best Practice pages.

sketch wrote:Regarding the elevation, I'm basically thinking "why not?" It certainly makes sense to have tunnels at a low but not railroad-low elevation—well; underwater tunnels, anyway, rather than tunnels through mountains and all.

I think the "why not" is because tunnels are not always below other roads when in the mountains as you mentioned. Current guidelines say to use relative elevation, but we have 0 saying "ground" in the editor. So mountain tunnels could be negative only if you consider there is ground above them. I suppose if the road entering the tunnel were elevated at +1 being on supports, the tunnel section could be -1 with no problem.

But before we go through all this, shouldn't we understand what Waze back end does with this information? If they assume a tunnel when below "ground" elevation, what is happening to our underpasses we have below ground?
USA: Now Idaho; previously California (Northern, SF/SJ)

ImageImageImageImageImageImage
PLEASE READ: Waze Map Editor (Start Here) | Editing Quick-start | Best Practices | Junctions
kentsmith9
Waze Global Champs
Waze Global Champs
 
Posts: 5578
Joined: Mon Apr 23, 2012 3:33 pm
Location: Boise ID and SF/SJ Bay Area of Northern California
Has thanked: 1507 times
Been thanked: 1711 times

Next

Return to Wiki Updates and Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users