You could use 176 Street/ Hwy 1 in Surrey, BC exits as a case study for this topic. In my opinion it is poorly edited.

A Wiki standard is consistency when labeling roads. If you actually look at all these segments, they are all edited by different people, at different levels. Some ramps are locked, others are not. The names of the exits differ from each other coming west vs east, even though they are going to the same place. Also there are 2 on ramps heading west yet one is labeled "to Trans Canada Hwy" (very vague description) and the other "Hwy 1 E - Hope" (correct).

Really, if someone makes whatever decision to name an exit a certain way, all the other on ramps/off ramps and cloverleafs should jive. I made one small edit identifying Hwy 17 because this is now a major route, and it wasn't there. But I can't update the rest because I don't have privileges yet. It needs some attention to make it correct and navigable.

I would like to see this get discussed some more, especially the HOV status. I can be your point main on the ground because I know the area well, and how the traffic flows. I'm willing to help out anyway I can.

Will you pass this on to other editors for their opinions? I strongly believe that the HOV issue should be debated because it really isn't working well here when you try to navigate, which is very unfortunate.

I had changed highways 1 and 2 to freeway a little while ago (as far as my editable areas would allow anyway. If someone could finish the rest that would be great). However, I didn't change them to freeways through smaller towns (Strathmore, Nanton, etc.) where the speed limit drops to 50 or 60. I considered changing them to freeway to keep it consistent, but I thought that the client would route through the town, when it is usually much quicker to bypass using range or township roads.
Also, regarding range and township roads. Some counties have different naming conventions for them. Range road xxx, range road xx-x and range xx - road x. Range xx-road x is technically the correct way they should all be written. My questions is, should we be keeping them all consistent by leaving them as displayed on the map (range road xxx) or changing them all to range xx-road x. Or the third option, marking them on the map as they are displayed in each respective county?
Any thoughts?

doctorkb wrote: Some Range Roads are paved. Some are not. Would it not make sense for the map / routing engine to give some indication of which are more traversable for the general population?

The fact of the matter is that, for the majority of the population, gravel and dirt are the same thing when it comes to roads: unpleasant for long stretches. Yes, we can split hairs and say they're different, but then we should also be distinguishing between seal-coated and paved surfaces, asphalt from concrete, etc.

I totally agree. I would be kind of pissed if I was routed down a barely traversable gravel road which was marked as a street or primary highway. Fortunately I travel around the province a lot for work, so I generally know which roads are gravel or paved anyway. But not everyone does. Ive been changing the rural roads similar to the way doctorkb has been, except I determine whether it is a street or primary street based on speed limit: 80 or above as a primary, below 80 as a street.

hurley108 wrote: As to the rest of the highways, I'd say all the secondaries (500 and up) should be Minor Highways, and the primaries (1-100) should all be majors, except for the select few freeways we've been talking about.

Further to the gravel/dirt road discussion, we would have to be careful about changing all 500 series and up highways to minor highways. Some of them (Highway 861 for example) are actually gravel road.

Someone earlier in the thread was asking the abbreviations for township and range roads; township road is abbreviated to Twp Rd, and range road is Rge Rd.

james8970 wrote:The only case where ramp should list multiple streets is when it splits into two or more ramps that lead to different streets. I don't understand the need of the destination city. If someone knows where they are going, why does a ramp have to repeat it? Even if you don't know how you're getting from A to B, surely you still know what city the destination is in.
James

If you don't mind a voice from south of the border chiming in on this ... on many of the freeway ramps in NY, I only put the exit number and the city, omitting the road names/numbers altogether (unless no city is listed). The reason is simple: the name on the sign is the biggest and boldest thing there, at least how they're written around here. When I think of where I get off the Interstate to go to work, I don't think of getting onto State Route 36 -- I think of getting off at "the Hornell exit".

Maybe it's different on your side of the border ... but that's why I include the city on ramps.

james8970 wrote:The problem with this is that, while that exit may be "the Hornell exit" to you, I'm sure the exit serves more than just Hornell, in which case it could be "the Caniesto exit" for someone else.

No one in the world thinks that it could be "the Caniesto exit" (except you, apparently), because there is nowhere near this exit called "Caniesto". People who want to go to Canisteo, however, do know that they have to get off at "the Hornell exit", because that's the name that the big green exit sign has posted on it.

Bottom line: The name that the sign has on it is the name that should be on the ramp. Every "best practices" guide in the Waze Wiki states this -- look it up.

james8970 wrote:... What needs attention along Hwy 17 aside from that one ramp locked by a staff member. I made an unlock request for that and it still hasn't been unlocked. Going to address that once I finish this post. ...

That one has been unlocked now, per a PM that I got from Jonypony an hour or so ago.

james8970 wrote:Furthermore, as doctorkb and I have displayed by our response time here, I think both of us are pretty available and prompt to deal with any errors that may suddenly need to be addressed.
James

I'm grateful for that as well ... it wasn't easy being about the only CM that actively addressed Canadian unlock requests (especially since I'm not Canadian -- thanks for not holding that against me ). I'm glad that some of you have now stepped up (or stepped back in ) to help your fellow countrymen, especially since I haven't been as active in the last month or two.