The place to get information and ask questions about everything to do with properly and successfully editing the Waze Map.

Use this forum for all general editing questions, and the sub-forums for specific types of Waze Map Editor features.

Post Reply

Not satisfied with "to xxx" ramp naming

Post by AlanOfTheBerg
This is rather US-specific, but has applicability elsewhere I believe.

I've been following the current naming standards for limited access road on-ramps and it seemed right, but lately, I have not been satisfied. The primary reason for this is that when there are slow traffic conditions being reported at multiple on-ramps for a segment of freeway, then what you see on the client is a series of "Moderate traffic on to I-xx S" and "Standstill on to I-xx S" and on and on. When the freeway traffic is bad, the on-ramp traffic is bad, and then you get very unhelpful popups because every single one of those ramps is named identically.

I believe we need a way to concisely differentiate these on-ramps similar to the Exit ramps having the exit number, which is usually a mileage/milepost number. Or perhaps just add the road name of the previous segment to the ramp, like "to I-xx from <source road name>".

Thoughts?
AlanOfTheBerg
EmeritusChamps
EmeritusChamps
Posts: 23627
Has thanked: 568 times
Been thanked: 3479 times

POSTER_ID:701618

1

Send a message
Wiki Resources: Map Editing Manual | alanoftheberg@gmail.com
Oregon-based US Ex-Global Champ Editor | iPhone13Pro - VZ

Post by AlanOfTheBerg
CBenson wrote:... is this problem any different from a report that says "Moderate traffic on I-xx S" when you're not sure where on I-xx (i.e. on which of the identically named segments) the jam actually is?
Yes, you are correct that it is no different, and that frustrates me as well. However, I often see "Moderate traffic on xyzzy near the neighborhood of <something> or "Complete standstill on xyzzy between <city1> and <city2>" for highways and interstates, which gives a little more context. It doesn't happen that way all the time, but it is better than my on-ramp complaint.
AlanOfTheBerg
EmeritusChamps
EmeritusChamps
Posts: 23627
Has thanked: 568 times
Been thanked: 3479 times
Send a message
Wiki Resources: Map Editing Manual | alanoftheberg@gmail.com
Oregon-based US Ex-Global Champ Editor | iPhone13Pro - VZ

Post by AlanOfTheBerg
harling wrote:As a programmer, special-case handling like that feels a bit hack-ish, but it's still preferable to breaking the naming convention.
Agreed. But, who came up with the naming conventions to begin with? Was it really Waze HQ? I wonder if I go back to the first version of the wiki page who created it and what did it say about ramps? Or was the ramp and some other conventions 100% user-driven? Dunno. Haven't looked yet myself.
AlanOfTheBerg
EmeritusChamps
EmeritusChamps
Posts: 23627
Has thanked: 568 times
Been thanked: 3479 times
Send a message
Wiki Resources: Map Editing Manual | alanoftheberg@gmail.com
Oregon-based US Ex-Global Champ Editor | iPhone13Pro - VZ

Post by AlanOfTheBerg
harling wrote:the name of a ramp should match whatever signage is posted for it in the real world (e.g., "Exit 37A: I-93 / Boston")
I hope you put that colon in there accidentally because it's not part of the naming standard.

We agree, as we usually seem to, so I'm curious about your thoughts of appending the from street to the ramp name? Or maybe, "to I-90 W at MP 50" or "to I-44 at exit 50" ...
AlanOfTheBerg
EmeritusChamps
EmeritusChamps
Posts: 23627
Has thanked: 568 times
Been thanked: 3479 times
Send a message
Wiki Resources: Map Editing Manual | alanoftheberg@gmail.com
Oregon-based US Ex-Global Champ Editor | iPhone13Pro - VZ

Post by AlanOfTheBerg
WeeeZer14 wrote:I'm reminded of a comment I've made a time or two... the naming of roads is trying to fulfill at least 4 separate purposes and each one may conflict with the others:
Yes, exactly. I want the best of four worlds. :) For now, that isn't going to happen, though. Too many conflicts to warrant changing the naming standards.
AlanOfTheBerg
EmeritusChamps
EmeritusChamps
Posts: 23627
Has thanked: 568 times
Been thanked: 3479 times
Send a message
Wiki Resources: Map Editing Manual | alanoftheberg@gmail.com
Oregon-based US Ex-Global Champ Editor | iPhone13Pro - VZ

Post by AlanOfTheBerg
I've decided my original idea is not a good one. The client needs to be smarter about how it is reporting where a traffic jam or hazard is. We shouldn't be naming roads to make up for (current) shortcomings in the client. Hopefully, there will be future versions which will be able to address this.
AlanOfTheBerg
EmeritusChamps
EmeritusChamps
Posts: 23627
Has thanked: 568 times
Been thanked: 3479 times
Send a message
Wiki Resources: Map Editing Manual | alanoftheberg@gmail.com
Oregon-based US Ex-Global Champ Editor | iPhone13Pro - VZ

Post by CBenson
AlanOfTheBerg wrote:Thoughts?
I don't think I understand the problem. Is this an on-ramp problem or a generic traffic reporting problem. In other words, is this problem any different from a report that says "Moderate traffic on I-xx S" when you're not sure where on I-xx (i.e. on which of the identically named segments) the jam actually is?
CBenson
EmeritusChamps
EmeritusChamps
Posts: 10330
Has thanked: 608 times
Been thanked: 1642 times
Send a message
Regional Coordinator: Mid-Atlantic, US
Verizon, Nexus 6, Android 6.0.1, Waze 4.7.0.902

Post by gerardrjj
I agree that the "TO I-10E" is the naming that matches the signage the driver's see, but implicit in the signage is the local of the reader.

To drive the point home using local naming for my region:

There is a collision at the on-ramp from Higley Rd to AZ Loop 202 W. The ramp is closed, but the freeway is open.
Currently Waze will report an issue solely with the road "TO Loop 202 W". I could go 1 mile in either direction and enter the Loop 202 W at Recker Rd, or Power Rd with no issues.

When one reads a sign that states "To AZ Loop 202", they are reading it from a specific location. The current Waze naming and reporting norms do not account for this or that there are about 15 "To Loop 202 W" ramps.
Ideally a ramp should be named for both the source and destination, ie "To AZ Loop 202 W from Recker Rd."
Since the ramps from Power and Higley Rds are not affected.
gerardrjj
Posts: 8
Send a message

Post by hallmike
I'm not a fan of it either. Like you said, it's too generic.
hallmike
Posts: 505
Been thanked: 6 times
Send a message
https://photos.imageevent.com/hallmike/ ... llmike.jpg ...when you care enough to Waze the very best

Post by hallmike
It seems like a good idea, but would it be confusing in voice navigation?
hallmike
Posts: 505
Been thanked: 6 times
Send a message
https://photos.imageevent.com/hallmike/ ... llmike.jpg ...when you care enough to Waze the very best