Is it Acceptable to Map a Roundabout Incorrectly?

Image

Moderators: Unholy, Timbones

Re: Is it Acceptable to Map a Roundabout Incorrectly?

Postby Xenon2020 » Fri Sep 26, 2014 1:44 pm

It looks to have been ok since Tuesday morning from the exit count point of view. I haven't tested the voice instructions but the correct exit number shows.

Thanks.
Xenon2020
 
Posts: 18
Joined: Thu Apr 24, 2014 3:05 pm
Has thanked: 2 times
Been thanked: 0 time

Re: Is it Acceptable to Map a Roundabout Incorrectly?

Postby Xenon2020 » Wed Jul 02, 2014 11:21 am

I noticed this problem yesterday. Personally I would not count Under the Wood as an exit on the roundabout. Coming south on the A404 it is very easy to miss the exit to Under the Wood and therefore would not be counted as an exit by most users. Therefore taking the 3rd exit when coming south most would head towards Marlow as this is the 3rd exit on the road signs.
Xenon2020
 
Posts: 18
Joined: Thu Apr 24, 2014 3:05 pm
Has thanked: 2 times
Been thanked: 0 time

Re: Is it Acceptable to Map a Roundabout Incorrectly?

Postby wolfsbane2k » Thu Jun 26, 2014 9:52 am

We have a similar issue here:
https://www.waze.com/editor/?zoom=6&lat ... 09&env=row

where the petrol station is on the roundabout, but doesn't get drawn on the signs. It looks like PealRinger and I have inadvertently umm'd , ahh'd and see-sawed about this one as well, as we end up with the junction numbering being off as well.
Mondeo Driver, lurking somewhere on the M27 but no longer editing.
wolfsbane2k
 
Posts: 758
Joined: Sun Jun 30, 2013 8:16 pm
Location: United Kingdom
Has thanked: 45 times
Been thanked: 42 times

Re: Is it Acceptable to Map a Roundabout Incorrectly?

Postby Twister-UK » Tue Sep 23, 2014 11:19 am

The actual roundabout has now been updated based on the results of my test designs, and *fingers crossed* appears to be behaving exactly as required...
Chris (not to be confused with Chris or Chris...)
L4 AM SE England & Shetland Islands / WME Beta Tester / Script Writer
WME/Livemap enhancement scripts @ GreasyFork and Chrome Web Store
Twister-UK
Beta tester
Beta tester
 
Posts: 5812
Joined: Sat Jan 07, 2012 12:00 am
Location: NW London
Has thanked: 440 times
Been thanked: 2602 times

Re: Is it Acceptable to Map a Roundabout Incorrectly?

Postby Twister-UK » Fri Sep 05, 2014 5:07 pm

I've been cultivating different test roundabout designs up in a secluded bit of the Shetlands, and I think I've got one which will give the desired results here - just need to wait for the next tile update to check the fine tuning I did this morning... If that looks good, I'll rebuild the A404 one to match, and hopefully that'll be the end of it.

Until some bright spark posts a UR complaining that there are actually 5 exits on the roundabout :lol:
Chris (not to be confused with Chris or Chris...)
L4 AM SE England & Shetland Islands / WME Beta Tester / Script Writer
WME/Livemap enhancement scripts @ GreasyFork and Chrome Web Store
Twister-UK
Beta tester
Beta tester
 
Posts: 5812
Joined: Sat Jan 07, 2012 12:00 am
Location: NW London
Has thanked: 440 times
Been thanked: 2602 times

Re: Is it Acceptable to Map a Roundabout Incorrectly?

Postby Twister-UK » Mon Aug 18, 2014 6:45 am

NorfolkMustard wrote:I drove this roundabout today, coming south on the A404. Still not giving a numbered exit, voice or visual, guidance on approach.

In my view it would be fine for under-the-wood to be a separate exit. It's a surprise when you see it, but when you do then the exit number waze has given you will make sence


Given that this was how I'd mapped the roundabout back at the start of this thread, I'd be only too happy to stick UtW on its own exit again, thus both matching the real-world geometry of the junction and clearing up this unexplained 0th exit error.

Except we'd then be back to square one as far as having to deal with countless URs from people who don't like the idea of the exit count in Waze not matching up with the exit count they've calculated from looking at the signs on the approach to the roundabout.

If we could resolve this 0th exit problem then I'd be happy - although it wouldn't be a wholly accurate rendition of the roundabout, it'd be the one which generates the least amount of URs.

Since the roundabout shouldn't be behaving like this, and since it IS behaving like this even after having been completely torn down and rebuilt with new segments, perhaps it's something the Waze team could look at?
Chris (not to be confused with Chris or Chris...)
L4 AM SE England & Shetland Islands / WME Beta Tester / Script Writer
WME/Livemap enhancement scripts @ GreasyFork and Chrome Web Store
Twister-UK
Beta tester
Beta tester
 
Posts: 5812
Joined: Sat Jan 07, 2012 12:00 am
Location: NW London
Has thanked: 440 times
Been thanked: 2602 times

Re: Is it Acceptable to Map a Roundabout Incorrectly?

Postby Twister-UK » Wed Jul 23, 2014 9:18 pm

OK, so something isn't right here :? Following the original merging of the Under the Wood and A308 exit nodes, the client was giving me 0th exit errors. I checked the roundabout and noticed one segment was defined A-B whereas all the others were B-A, so decided to rebuild the entire thing just to be sure the data was clean.

As there have been several tile updates since this last bit of tweaking, I'm assuming the roundabout now in use by the client and livemap is this latest revision and not the earlier, visually identical, version. Yet I'm still seeing the 0th exit error in the client and also in the route instructions returned by Tim's route checker script...

Help!!!
Chris (not to be confused with Chris or Chris...)
L4 AM SE England & Shetland Islands / WME Beta Tester / Script Writer
WME/Livemap enhancement scripts @ GreasyFork and Chrome Web Store
Twister-UK
Beta tester
Beta tester
 
Posts: 5812
Joined: Sat Jan 07, 2012 12:00 am
Location: NW London
Has thanked: 440 times
Been thanked: 2602 times

Re: Is it Acceptable to Map a Roundabout Incorrectly?

Postby Twister-UK » Wed Jul 09, 2014 12:42 pm

I've now moved Under the Wood onto the same node as the A308 exit, which should restore the "correct" exit count in the client instructions without also preventing correct routing into or out of UtW (as was the case in the layout prior to my earlier edit). Let's see what sort of feedback this revised layout generates...
Chris (not to be confused with Chris or Chris...)
L4 AM SE England & Shetland Islands / WME Beta Tester / Script Writer
WME/Livemap enhancement scripts @ GreasyFork and Chrome Web Store
Twister-UK
Beta tester
Beta tester
 
Posts: 5812
Joined: Sat Jan 07, 2012 12:00 am
Location: NW London
Has thanked: 440 times
Been thanked: 2602 times

Re: Is it Acceptable to Map a Roundabout Incorrectly?

Postby Twister-UK » Thu Jun 26, 2014 12:56 pm

Timbones wrote:
Twister-UK wrote:I thought sharing roundabout nodes was still a no-no due to the risk of triggering a 0th exit error?

No it doesn't, it just messes up the node counting.


Good to know, thanks.
Chris (not to be confused with Chris or Chris...)
L4 AM SE England & Shetland Islands / WME Beta Tester / Script Writer
WME/Livemap enhancement scripts @ GreasyFork and Chrome Web Store
Twister-UK
Beta tester
Beta tester
 
Posts: 5812
Joined: Sat Jan 07, 2012 12:00 am
Location: NW London
Has thanked: 440 times
Been thanked: 2602 times

Re: Is it Acceptable to Map a Roundabout Incorrectly?

Postby Twister-UK » Thu Jun 26, 2014 6:30 am

ditchi56 wrote:
AndyPot2 wrote:one solution would be to connect Under the Wood to the same node as the A308

Here's an example of a roundabout with two roads connected to the same node, if you want to play and test the exit counts. I think it has the effect you want.


I thought sharing roundabout nodes was still a no-no due to the risk of triggering a 0th exit error?
Chris (not to be confused with Chris or Chris...)
L4 AM SE England & Shetland Islands / WME Beta Tester / Script Writer
WME/Livemap enhancement scripts @ GreasyFork and Chrome Web Store
Twister-UK
Beta tester
Beta tester
 
Posts: 5812
Joined: Sat Jan 07, 2012 12:00 am
Location: NW London
Has thanked: 440 times
Been thanked: 2602 times

Next

Return to United Kingdom

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users