AlanOfTheBerg wrote:

jenncard wrote:Can someone fix this in Northern California? ign_katerina connected this ramp to the WRONG SIDE of the highway.
https://www.waze.com/cartouche/?zoom=5& ... ts=5398763

Done.

You have this nifty little script showing you all the country, state, and city names, and you don't take the opportunity to hack a little bit out of the Portola Valley Mega-Smudge that covers the western half of NV and southern CA?

AlanOfTheBerg wrote:

bgodette wrote:You have this nifty little script showing you all the country, state, and city names, and you don't take the opportunity to hack a little bit out of the Portola Valley Mega-Smudge that covers the western half of NV and southern CA?

Yeah, I saw that. And I figured I could help a little, but ... I'm working on other areas. I didn't read the detail on where the real Portola Valley is, so I also didn't want to change it if I was really there.

Google says it's here and the smudge covers from 42.0 to 37.0 and east to -114.120. So it's basically all of northern CA right up to the coastline to the northern border and nearly to the eastern edge of NV.

WeeeZer14 wrote:It is a fairly complex intersection as you may be able to see:

https://www.waze.com/cartouche/?zoom=7& ... FTTTFTTTTT

Nice, it's a modified CFI with jug-handles, I'm impressed NJ. And impressive mapping there, I couldn't find anything out of place.

From looking at the everyone-weekly scoreboard today, I wonder if any of the heavy IGN editors are making glaring mistakes or if the ones which we're stumbling on seem to be their newbies/light editors. My quick check through this thread says no.

gettingthere wrote:Wow! IGN_yulia is on top of it and realizes that the interchange doesn't have to match the aerials! Yea!

https://www.waze.com/cartouche_old/?zoo ... 1=63060243

Not bad considering the shortage of GPS tracks. And it seems to be junctioned, leveled, and turn restricted correctly.

jasonm128 wrote:This isn't technically an IGN mistake because it was made by andzhelo(6) (which is probably worse since a genuine Waze employee should know better):

https://www.waze.com/cartouche/?zoom=3& ... s=63026046

Just because the GPS points take a shortcut doesn't mean there's actually a road there.

Although, I will say that I'm surprised by the number and consistency of the bad GPS points here. That stretch of I-93 cuts through a bunch of hills so I suppose people are losing their GPS lock and then regaining it after the hills, but I've driven that many times and never had the slightest problem.

That's simply mind boggling how consistent the false tracks are there. And it isn't like you're driving at the bottom of a valley with 200ft cliffs on either side either. I'm betting this was caused by just a few people (or even one) that just happen to lose and regain data coverage at exactly the same spot every day on their commute.

jenncard wrote:Does anyone know, when we report the ign mistakes on the form, do they always get fixed or should we fix ourselves?

I reported damage to the I-25 & University SPUI, then waited a little over a week before going ahead and fixing it. It generated about 3 or 4 URs during the wait.

Since the only people who know what's been reported are those that reported and Waze staff, it's hard to know if they have fixed any of the reported issues. And I still say the best way to train the IGN editors and potentially avoid future issues, is to have the one(s) who broke it, fix it.

gettingthere wrote:

bgodette wrote:And I still say the best way to train the IGN editors and potentially avoid future issues, is to have the one(s) who broke it, fix it.

This sounds great, but if they don't fix it quickly everyone using Waze in areas affected by these bad edits suffer. Not in the community spirit unfortunately...

It's like pointing the finger at someone else but never actually fixing the problem when you have the power to do so! Let's not become like the US Congress, Greek political system, etc.

Which is why I gave them a week after reporting it, then fixed it for the 2nd time as a result of IGN damage.

On a positive note it does seem like some of them are keeping up with best practices. This just happened. IGN_Polina got to the Papyrus map problem before I did somewhere in the span of ~30 minutes, so I still had the problem pin, but it was already resolved.

Nothing to fault with the work, all turn restrictions in relation to the work done are correct, and road typing is following our still in-flux standard (iow what type other than NOT Ramp should a dedicated turn lane be), and it wasn't over-edited. Of course gettingthere will complain about the lack of need for the dedicated turn lanes to begin with, but that's a different issue. The work done here was correct for resolving the map problem as presented by the editor.

This whole issue seems to be one of training, experience, and communication with the volunteer community.

gettingthere wrote:Since it's expected:

Complain, complain - lay off the unnecessary turning lanes!

I expect to see that on a picketing sign at the NA meeting.

Sent from my SGH-T959V using Tapatalk