[New Page Proposal] Places

Moderator: Unholy

Re: [New Page Proposal] Places

Postby vectorspace » Fri Mar 28, 2014 7:29 pm

AlanOfTheBerg wrote:...I disagree on this. Just like the guidance of many other places in the wiki, such as road types to use, how to map parking lots, etc., I think this page is really quite good as a starting point to getting POI data flooding into the Waze databases without overwhelming the app map with garbage. <- With the caveat that we don't even know how Points will look in the app. It may be a disaster. :)


I interpret that as a balance between flexibility, standards, and an overwhelming concern that people will start putting junk down without some guidance... :) I really do agree its a good starting point, but we have a lot more to learn.

I have another experience to share about the value of Places (Area is all i know, I don't know what a point will look like yet).

When you do a POI search, let it search and pick an item, you're presented with a map display of your destination. For instance, I wanted to go to a Sonic (a drive in) to get a soda. I thought I picked the right one out of the list, but was uncertain. When it displayed the small destination map, right there were several other landmarks that gave me a spatial reference and that let me know I had picked the right one.

So... the point (and principle) is that Places that display well on the map are critical to aid in navigation and selection of destinations. Avoiding putting them on the map is a mistake. They don't clutter the map if done well. All I know is that these Places were areas and displayed names. The names were of use to me as well as the general footprint (area) of the landmarks.
vectorspace
vectorspace
 
Posts: 1185
Joined: Sat Dec 17, 2011 7:05 pm
Location: Albuquerque, NM, USA
Has thanked: 173 times
Been thanked: 422 times

Re: [New Page Proposal] Places

Postby vectorspace » Thu Apr 03, 2014 12:07 am

I just learned something about Place-Areas that I didn't know before, or might be a new behavior... not sure.

I was editing something I created in Feb 2012 to bring it up to standards on "landmarks" when I received a save error. OrbitC helped me figure out what it was...

You cannot have two identically named Area Places that overlap, otherwise saving throws an error in WME. I am not saying that is bad, it just is. Some WIKI page might want to document that.
vectorspace
vectorspace
 
Posts: 1185
Joined: Sat Dec 17, 2011 7:05 pm
Location: Albuquerque, NM, USA
Has thanked: 173 times
Been thanked: 422 times

Re: [New Page Proposal] Places

Postby vectorspace » Thu Apr 10, 2014 3:33 am

petervdveen wrote:...What about rivers?
Most rivers have about 20 or 30 different landmarks. They always overlap.


Very good point... It's not just rivers but other waterways not on the water layer.
vectorspace
vectorspace
 
Posts: 1185
Joined: Sat Dec 17, 2011 7:05 pm
Location: Albuquerque, NM, USA
Has thanked: 173 times
Been thanked: 422 times

Re: [New Page Proposal] Places

Postby vectorspace » Thu Apr 10, 2014 4:09 am

Hi everyone,

I've been busy with other things and also waiting for the map tiles to update. Since they updated, I see that I cannot see Point Places on client. Is this the intended behavior of Point Places on the client?

Assuming so, I would like to briefly revisit one of passionate beliefs around Area Places and ask if this is going to be considered in the guidance I see in the Places Wiki page. My opinions are based upon these principles, which certainly may not be common to everyone's beliefs:

(1) Viewable, visible Landmarks (an important local navigation aid represented by an Area Places) are valuable assets on the client display, within reason.
(1a) People use them when navigating to locate themselves spatially.
(1b) People describe their location or path with them (third left after the Walmart).
(1c) People scroll around on the client display to find them, touch the screen there, and direct waze to take them to that location. POI search is not everything.
(1d) ... etc.

(2) There are local variations in Area Places that cannot be reasonably instituted or mandated at a Country level yet along a Global level. Local variation is a strength of Waze that should not be quashed.
(2a) Critical Visible Landmarks would also be associated to things that you do while in cars, trucks, etc. such as Car Drive Ins (Sonic, for instance), truck stops, car washes, etc...

(3) A universal, absolute, without exception, determination of Point or Area based upon Primary Category is excessive and if pursued is going to waste a lot of time in debate. It is also going to negatively impact the Waze Community of new editors that do not follow every nuance of the Wiki because it is crowed sourced and Place Police (you know this already has happened in the past before Places) deleting others' work will contribute to driving away good editors. A solution should be intuitive, inclusive, and simple in order to avoid this.

(4) At the Palo Alto Meetup, I heard Waze say that more content was good, including Area type Landmarks. If you look at Google Maps, they have every building mapped. (I am not saying that is what we should do.)

(5) To reiterate my prior point, I assume that Point Places do not show up in the Client.

So, given those, here are some comments and questions:

<A> I don't understand why so many of the Places in the Wiki are only Point Places. Particularly those which could have "Landmark" value. For instance, a Walmart or a Hardware Store may be a critical Landmark in a town or local community. Why would you force it to be a Point?

I would rather there be guidance in the Wiki that states that when an item is really a navigation landmark and has value as an Area, then make it an Area, otherwise make it a Point. What about that?

<A-2> Why should all listed area items be areas? For instance, why is "military" always an area? Sometimes it could be a point! You might have a big convenience center as an area but particular points within it be important. Why is it absolute? Why is a Prison an Area only? There may be different areas for which points would work well.

<B> I don't have much interest at all in mapping all the new Place types. For instance, "gifts" and "ice cream" ?? I don't see the value of us putting these on maps when the maintenance logistics of maintaining all that stuff will grow quickly. Seems that is better a Point Place from some database that

<C> I can truly see the value of Points in not cluttering the map in some cases, like airports where you might want an Area Place with all of the individual destinations as Points.
vectorspace
vectorspace
 
Posts: 1185
Joined: Sat Dec 17, 2011 7:05 pm
Location: Albuquerque, NM, USA
Has thanked: 173 times
Been thanked: 422 times

Re: [New Page Proposal] Places

Postby vectorspace » Thu Apr 24, 2014 3:21 am

qwaletee, DwarfLord, Sketch,

Thanks very much for the discussion. Very good points. It seems that you agree and disagree with me, perhaps because of the uncertainty of what a future client will hold for us. I don't say I am always right, but prefer to speak up for what I understand or think (at the moment at least).

I do believe there might be too much over-thinking of this with a bit much about "what-ifs" and "let's wait and see," and scenarios about abuse by merchant wars, because who knows what will really happen and we can adjust then. I worry that setting standards in place makes difficult change in the future.

I continue to worry that overly constraining rules drive away innovation of use and value to local communities -- a power that waze can provide. Why eliminate this by too stringent of rules just for the sake of conformity? Some people like to make rules because they like order. Some chaos can be good. You can constrain chaos by having a principle, as I suggested by defining what a "landmark" means. The liquor store wars would not qualify. But marking "The Owl Cafe" in San Antonio, New Mexico would qualify because it is a historically significant restaurant. Under current rules this would only be a point. Maybe a point will work in the future, but it doesn't now. Let's not destroy current content for the promise of something that doesn't exist.

I didn't see anyone comment on the use of Area Places as useful scroll and point navigation aids. Of course that might also work in a new client that shows Point Places. Who knows.

And finally, while I respect DwarfLoar's comments "And finally, the application is GPS enabled. Appropriate landmarks are nice, definitely nice, but they will always be secondary navigation support." I would again defend my position that POI search is not king all the time. Seeing landmark areas on the map give you spatial reference of where you are and how to move around -- it is how our brains work. Eliminating it on the map because of some absolute and inflexible edict or rule driven by an overly strong desire for order on the Wiki drives away innovation and value to the users (in my opinion).

I like seeing sketch's horns show a bit when he said, "I do agree with vectorspace that Area Places are not a Bad Thing and maybe we should be more generous with them. I always liked the way the "don't do this" example client screenshots looked." It's not that he agreed (kind of) with me, it's that his comment showed some value for discretion now and then.

Bureaucrats stay away! Let's not drive away innovation and fun in editing the Waze map!
vectorspace
vectorspace
 
Posts: 1185
Joined: Sat Dec 17, 2011 7:05 pm
Location: Albuquerque, NM, USA
Has thanked: 173 times
Been thanked: 422 times

Re: [New Page Proposal] Places

Postby vectorspace » Thu Apr 24, 2014 11:42 pm

nzahn1 wrote:I know this technically is a World-related thread, but I had a USA-related Places question:
Are we going to be releasing naming guidelines for places as well?

For example: Should every school have "school" at the end of the name, or is Elementary, Middle, Jr. High, or High enough? e.g. "Woodbridge Elementary School" vs "Woodbridge Elementary."

I'm all about making visible names on the map more readable at a glance, and "school" looks redundant to me.


In absence of that guidance, I had considered from another thread (a long time ago) that client screen space was at a premium and we needed to abbreviate some things. I went to naming schools with ES for Elementary School, MS for Middle School and HS for High School, of course with the name before that abbreviation.
vectorspace
vectorspace
 
Posts: 1185
Joined: Sat Dec 17, 2011 7:05 pm
Location: Albuquerque, NM, USA
Has thanked: 173 times
Been thanked: 422 times

Re: [New Page Proposal] Places

Postby vectorspace » Fri Jul 18, 2014 1:42 am

shawndoc wrote:Any updates guidance on just how aggressive one should be at adding places? Any guidelines as to those that should be deleted?


My opinion would be...

  • Avoid deleting other's Area or Point places or converting from Area to Point. Why? Some Wazer editor has put some time into this and why do we want to dash someone's enthusiasm in adding content by seeing their work erased or altered.
  • Convert truly tiny Area Places to Point. Why? Because they will not show up on the Client if they are under the minimum size. Alternatively, if they were drawn to small, make them the appropriate larger size.
  • Add items that are truly "landmarks." Why? Because it adds value and interest to the map. It allows people to see they are near the landmark or have gone past it, so aids in visual navigation. It allows easier point-and-touch navigation in the client.
  • Read your state resources page to see if there is local preference. Engage in the dialoge with those editing in your state and region.
  • Avoid creating clutter by not adding less-important or tiny businesses. Why? It may be good to have a lot of Area Places in one location, and even many in a row. Completely tiling the map with uninteresting and rarely considered items that may disappear or go out of business in a year, we probably not only clutter the client map, we add a huge logistical maintenance issue to keep up with these things as they go out of business. If someone adds a small business, leave it alone so we are "fair."
vectorspace
vectorspace
 
Posts: 1185
Joined: Sat Dec 17, 2011 7:05 pm
Location: Albuquerque, NM, USA
Has thanked: 173 times
Been thanked: 422 times

Re: [New Page Proposal] Places

Postby vectorspace » Fri Jul 18, 2014 1:47 am

DwarfLord wrote:I have been converting things like fast food to Point Places, but some editors say that certain fast food places may be considered locally significant and could warrant an Area Place.


I think if there is local agreement on this, you could do that. What it takes away is the "landmark" value. This also takes away the point-and-touch navigation option. The reason why I would leave fast food places, particularly near Freeways and Major Highways is that a lot of people in cars navigate to them or look on the client map.

A long while ago I thought that the most important "landmarks" that were fast food were those that catered to people in cars, like Sonic Drive-Ins and the like, then realized all the major fast food places have bunches of people going through the drive-through. Look at the GPS layer...
vectorspace
vectorspace
 
Posts: 1185
Joined: Sat Dec 17, 2011 7:05 pm
Location: Albuquerque, NM, USA
Has thanked: 173 times
Been thanked: 422 times

Re: [New Page Proposal] Places

Postby voludu2 » Fri Sep 12, 2014 1:13 pm

Wow that's interesting. Good place to get the latest news and scuttlebut. We really need a gossip columnist to scour all the wiki page discussions and dredge up the stuff that is not announced anywhere yet!

And now for something completely different:

https://wiki.waze.com/wiki/Places
Proposal for change: I would like to make the following proposed changes, in order to make it more clear to new editors what the guidelines are for creating point and area places, and why. This will make a link to https://wiki.waze.com/wiki/Places in a friendly-gram to a new editor, if it says in the very first three paragraphs that they MUST add an address, take care with the stop point, choose appropriate category(ies), avoid adding area places, "never" add a parking lot. and read more about gas stations.

Places is the Waze Point of Interest (POI) system. There are two types of places: '''Point''' and '''Area'''. Both types of places are searchable. Area Places are shown on the map, but Point Places are not. Places should always be completed with a street address and one or more [[#When_to_use_Area_or_Point|categories]] to aid in searches. The stop point should be placed on or very near to the driveable segment to which Waze should direct the driver.

[[#Point Places|Point Places]] create Waze-searchable POIs, but {{as of|August 2014}} don't show up on the app display. Point places are most useful for destinations that are not listed in other POI search engines such as Google, or which are not listed by category in the other search engines. Places that are already listed in Google often do not need to be added in Waze, unless they are missing from a search category. See [[#When_to_use_Area_or_Point|the table of Place categories and types]] for guidance on when to use a point place.

[[#Area Places|Area Places]] (formerly called '''Landmarks''') should be used sparingly and only for true landmarks. They do everything Point Places do, and also provide an area outline on the map display. Overuse clutters the small screen and makes it more difficult for wazers to orient themselves to the map while briefly stopped at a light. If a location is not distinctive and significant enough to orient drivers, it should not be marked with an Area Place. See [[#When_to_use_Area_or_Point|the table of Place categories and types]] for guidelines on when to use an area vs a point place.

[[Gas station|Gas Station]] is a special type of area place. Waze uses gas station places for gas price reporting and for gas station navigation . Please read more about [[Gas station|Gas Station]]. [[#Parking_Lot|parking lot]] points and places should almost never be added to the map. Please read more about [[#Parking_Lot|parking lot]]s.


== Client Rendering ==
Delete this section. This information now appears in the lead paragraph.


In the table of categories, I'd like to add a link to gas stations:
|-
| Car Services
| [[Gas station|Gas Station]]
| Area
| Many gas stations also have convenience stores and ATMs. Remember to use "Gas Station" as the primary category and the add any others which are relevant. Follow the [[Gas station|Gas Station]] guidelines.
[ img ][ img ][ img ][ img ]
[ img ]
USA Northeast Region Discord Chat
Country Manager - USA and Thailand
Wiki Master, Global Mentor
utilitas, simplicitas, retentionis
voludu2
Country Manager
Country Manager
 
Posts: 3098
Joined: Thu Jul 24, 2014 12:33 pm
Location: Chester County, Pennsylvania
Has thanked: 819 times
Been thanked: 1255 times

Re: [New Page Proposal] Places

Postby voludu2 » Fri Sep 12, 2014 2:47 pm

Usability, Simplicity, Retention. That's my wiki-editing motto of the day. :)

I saw that the sectoin on Point place already refers to the pin as a "stop point". So I figured it would be safe to use it. If that needs to change, I could go with "pin or stop point". When they get to the more detailed sections, the readers will see the term appropriate to the section they are reading.
[ img ][ img ][ img ][ img ]
[ img ]
USA Northeast Region Discord Chat
Country Manager - USA and Thailand
Wiki Master, Global Mentor
utilitas, simplicitas, retentionis
voludu2
Country Manager
Country Manager
 
Posts: 3098
Joined: Thu Jul 24, 2014 12:33 pm
Location: Chester County, Pennsylvania
Has thanked: 819 times
Been thanked: 1255 times

PreviousNext

Return to Wiki Updates and Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users