Waze forum

Can someone offer some guidance as to what I should use as a City name for roads in London?

As background, London is both a city, and a (very large) area which is broken down into suburbs. I'm sure I read somewhere that the current thinking was to leave the city as London for all roads, but that kind of breaks when we have a whole list of streets (High Street, for example) which might exist 10+ times in the London area. Should I use town names (Harrow, South Harrow, Wealdstone, Harrow on the Hill, as examples from my local area), or London Borough names (Harrow being also a borough name as well as a town name, would cover all the above examples).

Regards
Paul

petervdveen wrote:Adding a row to a database is quiet easy. But getting it implemented can be very hard to realize..

This would likely be adding a column to the table describing attributes of segments. While that too is easy, it also involves:

1. What is the default value of ALL segments?
2. Should NULL (no value) be allowed? If not, how do you deal with segments for which you cannot determine a value?
3. The web code must be modified to present the new field on the correct panel
4. Does the web/javascript code need to filter data/ensure a value is entered or can it be left blank?
5. Code must be written to pass the value along to the database. That, or the query/database update code must be re-written to get the value to insert into the database field
6. The client app must be updated to allow the user to pass this value along as part of a search query
7. Does the client app need to show the region graphically?
8. Search involving this value must also pass this along to Bing for search results. Does Bing support this value in searches?
9. Navigation algorithms must be re-written to see and use the new region values as part of finding a route, otherwise, you might end up in the right city, wrong region

I am sure there are more parts to this process.

Hi,

I've been trying to keep Southampton suburb free. It should be just Southampton, no suburbs, no Hants as it is big and unique enough to not need the county bit. As it goes, West End is not in Southampton, but is in the Eastleigh Council area, so should be West End (Hants), as most of it is.

Kieron

Papyrus, the new editor, still has the State field. It is a drop down box with only Other in the list. It would be great, if this was county.

I thought at first this was a new thread!

David, using Tapatalk

I wish they would give us the county/region field because I am not a fan of the current method.

I have to admit I tend not to use the region convention unless there is actually a name clash as it's relatively rare in Scotland. When it does occur I locate the two towns and get support to append the region name which they can do very quickly with direct database access!

Catbells wrote:Papyrus, the new editor, still has the State field. It is a drop down box with only Other in the list. It would be great, if this was county.

A few have suggested this before. I've recently stressed to HQ that the requirement for a more granular breakdown is increasing due to the rise in editor numbers!

We currently have a "state" value which we set to "other" in the UK. Why not use that for counties.

Sent from my Nexus S using Tapatalk

leo_lau wrote:

faitaru wrote:We currently have a "state" value which we set to "other" in the UK. Why not use that for counties.

'state' field doesn't show on cartouche but I believe IT guy can do something to change it to 'county/region' for UK.

Cartouche is on the way out, so that isn't even an issue!

Sent from my Nexus S using Tapatalk

Yes, I'd go along with the general view but with the 'oddities caveat' in that I'd prefer to use:

'Wimbledon (Merton)' but 'Morden (Surrey)' even though both are in the London Borough of Merton.

I would like to make a suggestion, and hopefully all can be in agreement.
I think it's a pretty simple answer too

What about using OS Locator from Ordnance Survey's OpenData as a reference? I mean it's not like we'd be *using* it officially, it could just purely be for reference.

What I have been doing is, Rochester (Kent), and for smaller towns which are a part of Rochester for example, Strood, I have put these under Rochester too. The locals know both, and OS also does the same (although it does show smaller places like Earl, which is a housing estate of ~10 roads)...

The only problem arises when there are more than 1 road name the same, i.e. High Street in Strood and High Street in Rochester. In cases like these I plan to separate them out, still putting Rochester (Kent) in the City field, and adding the smaller town in brackets in the Street field, i.e.

Rochester (Kent)::High St (Strood)
and
Rochester (Kent)::High St << for the main Rochester high street it seems a little silly since the city name is Rochester.

What do you guys think about this way? It still follows the Wiki conventions, gives the Waze team what they asked of us, and keeps the edits to a minimum