City conflict naming update

Moderator: Unholy

Re: City conflict naming update

Postby CBenson » Fri Feb 20, 2015 4:49 pm

I don't like the Eliminate false names guidance. We are not using the postal address names in Maryland in lieu of the CDPs. Local business addresses are thus not our guide to the name to use in Waze. Of course this guidance predates being able to search for waze HNs or places. But until we better understand how searches will ultimately work, I don't see a reason to change our reliance on CDPs in areas that are not 100% incorporated. Thus, I preferred the previous guidance that if a CDP and a city conflict, you will probably append something to the city name.
Regional Coordinator: Mid-Altantic, US
Verizon, Droid Turbo, Android 4.4.4, Waze 3.9.4.0
CBenson
Waze Global Champs
Waze Global Champs
 
Posts: 9032
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2010 9:13 pm
Location: Crownsville, MD, US
Has thanked: 748 times
Been thanked: 1814 times

Re: City conflict naming update

Postby CBenson » Fri Feb 20, 2015 10:07 pm

No. But I'm fairly certain that language will be used to justify deleting CDPs in favor of postal addresses. What is in common use is subjective. Currently we would default to the CDP name in MD unless there is consensus that the name is not in common use.
Regional Coordinator: Mid-Altantic, US
Verizon, Droid Turbo, Android 4.4.4, Waze 3.9.4.0
CBenson
Waze Global Champs
Waze Global Champs
 
Posts: 9032
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2010 9:13 pm
Location: Crownsville, MD, US
Has thanked: 748 times
Been thanked: 1814 times

Re: City conflict naming update

Postby CBenson » Mon Feb 23, 2015 5:50 pm

qwaletee wrote:Many CDPs really are not used; many are. The CDP was developed by the Census office for their convenience in administering and reporting their activities and data. They use them for unincorporated areas (a good thing for mapping), incorpoarated areas that they do not recognize as incorporated (bad), and sometimes to break up or consolidate municipalities (bad).

I am not familiar with the Census Bureau not recognizing incorporated areas or using CDPs to break up or consolidate municipalities. So I can't really comment on addressing those issues.

qwaletee wrote:Now, how does that drive our discussion about conflicts? If a CDP is real and important, then it carries the similar weight as a real city name. But in other cases - probably the majority - why would we favor a weak CDP against a real city name?

I'm not quite ready to concede that in the majority of cases the CDP is not real and important. However, the answer is that "Town of Queen Anne" makes sense to people where there is a incorporated town of Queen Anne, so if there is a conflict it is easy to adjust the incorporated place name. What would be a clear name for the conflicting CDP of "Queen Anne"?
Regional Coordinator: Mid-Altantic, US
Verizon, Droid Turbo, Android 4.4.4, Waze 3.9.4.0
CBenson
Waze Global Champs
Waze Global Champs
 
Posts: 9032
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2010 9:13 pm
Location: Crownsville, MD, US
Has thanked: 748 times
Been thanked: 1814 times

Re: City conflict naming update

Postby CBenson » Mon Feb 23, 2015 10:27 pm

ialangford wrote:Well here's the question. If you are in Baltimore and say you're from "Queen Anne", which place do people think you're from?

Neither, before an editor raising this issue, I wasn't aware of either the town or the CDP, just the county. So if you had told me you were from "Queen Anne," I'd have thought you were referring to the county.

qwaletee wrote:But that doesn't mean we should write a guideline that explicitly pushes CDPs (unofficial names), over municipalities (official names), where the CDP is "not real" or "relatively unimportant." Where it makes sense to choose the CDP, the workflow allows for it, as in the Queen Anne case. Otherwise, it seems like a series of questionable assumptions.


We already did write such a guideline:
Current Wiki wrote:1. If a postal area or CDP (Census Designated Place as found on the Census Tract Maps) and a city conflict, append something to the city name, since CDPs and Postal areas don’t have any other common appellation.

This has worked for the conflict between a CDP and a city that I have dealt with, so I don't see a reason to change. I'm open to change, but am not sure what your current proposal is.
Regional Coordinator: Mid-Altantic, US
Verizon, Droid Turbo, Android 4.4.4, Waze 3.9.4.0
CBenson
Waze Global Champs
Waze Global Champs
 
Posts: 9032
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2010 9:13 pm
Location: Crownsville, MD, US
Has thanked: 748 times
Been thanked: 1814 times

Re: City conflict naming update

Postby CBenson » Mon Feb 23, 2015 10:45 pm

qwaletee wrote:And the existing guideline does NOT match the quote above it.

You said "that doesn't mean we should write a guideline that explicitly pushes CDP's (unofficial names), over municipalities (official names)." All I'm saying is that we already did and it is the current guidance in the wiki.
Regional Coordinator: Mid-Altantic, US
Verizon, Droid Turbo, Android 4.4.4, Waze 3.9.4.0
CBenson
Waze Global Champs
Waze Global Champs
 
Posts: 9032
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2010 9:13 pm
Location: Crownsville, MD, US
Has thanked: 748 times
Been thanked: 1814 times

Re: City conflict naming update

Postby CBenson » Thu Feb 26, 2015 4:15 pm

What inappropriate guidance would be taken from it?
Regional Coordinator: Mid-Altantic, US
Verizon, Droid Turbo, Android 4.4.4, Waze 3.9.4.0
CBenson
Waze Global Champs
Waze Global Champs
 
Posts: 9032
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2010 9:13 pm
Location: Crownsville, MD, US
Has thanked: 748 times
Been thanked: 1814 times

Re: City conflict naming update

Postby CBenson » Sat Feb 28, 2015 12:15 pm

I am in general agreement with the above. I unwilling to concede:
PhantomSoul wrote:[*] Postal Names seem to be out, because any given "block" of any road could (and very often does) interchangeably support multiple city names and/or multiple spelling variations of them. Waze simply does not have the facility to correctly handle this - nor do we have the ability to quantify an obvious most-likely-to-be-used name/variant, so we have to assume all such searches would just end up being forwarded to Google anyway.

Is not at all that I am a proponent of using the Postal Names. But the search capability in waze seem to be in continual state of flux. I'm not sure that we have (or will have) any less ability to handle variants than Google will. The problem is of course that we aren't getting much guidance from waze regarding the changes they continually seem to be making to the search functions. This makes it almost impossible to write these guidelines.

I would also note that the census data (with the CDPs) was the base map data in waze. I understand that the imported census map does not include Towns in the New England states, New York, and Wisconsin; Boroughs in New York; or townships as these are considered as minor civil divisions rather than places. In regions that don't include these features the census name structure may remain the basic underlying name structure. In such regions, the census names are the default and should be changed when there is agreement among the local editors that the name is not useful on the waze map or that there is another name that is useful on the waze map.
Regional Coordinator: Mid-Altantic, US
Verizon, Droid Turbo, Android 4.4.4, Waze 3.9.4.0
CBenson
Waze Global Champs
Waze Global Champs
 
Posts: 9032
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2010 9:13 pm
Location: Crownsville, MD, US
Has thanked: 748 times
Been thanked: 1814 times

Re: City conflict naming update

Postby CBenson » Sun Mar 01, 2015 3:24 pm

I'm saying that the census data was in fact the basemap data. Thus in some areas the census naming remains the de facto default naming. In areas where there has extensive editing to use place names not initially imported (such as township names) this de facto default condition may no longer remain.
Regional Coordinator: Mid-Altantic, US
Verizon, Droid Turbo, Android 4.4.4, Waze 3.9.4.0
CBenson
Waze Global Champs
Waze Global Champs
 
Posts: 9032
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2010 9:13 pm
Location: Crownsville, MD, US
Has thanked: 748 times
Been thanked: 1814 times

Re: City conflict naming update

Postby ialangford » Mon Feb 23, 2015 12:14 am

Well, around me no business uses a CDP for a name, with few exceptions. Almost all addresses in the area are the postal address. A lot of our CDP's are in areas that are addressed to much larger cities. That's why the guidance is local. In NJ, it makes lots of sense to map many CDP's. Around me, only a few need be retained (and boy do I have to fight to get them retained sometimes!)
Image
SM-South Carolina
Wer resten, der rosten.
ialangford
State Manager
State Manager
 
Posts: 150
Joined: Thu Mar 22, 2012 8:11 pm
Location: Columbia, SC
Has thanked: 38 times
Been thanked: 32 times

Re: City conflict naming update

Postby ialangford » Mon Feb 23, 2015 8:30 pm

Well here's the question. If you are in Baltimore and say you're from "Queen Anne", which place do people think you're from?
Image
SM-South Carolina
Wer resten, der rosten.
ialangford
State Manager
State Manager
 
Posts: 150
Joined: Thu Mar 22, 2012 8:11 pm
Location: Columbia, SC
Has thanked: 38 times
Been thanked: 32 times

Next

Return to Wiki Updates and Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users