[Script] WME Validator 1.1.20 / 03.11.2016

Discussion for the unofficial, community-developed addons, extensions and scripts built for the Waze Map Editor.

The official index of these tools is the Community Plugins, Extensions and Tools wiki page.

Moderators: Unholy, bextein

Forum rules
Discussion for the unofficial, community-developed addons, extensions and scripts built for the Waze Map Editor.

DO NOT START a new thread unless it is about a new idea. Keep discussion of existing tools within the main thread for that tool.

The official index of these tools is the Community Plugins, Extensions and Tools wiki page.

Re: same andpoints

Postby dbraughlr » Fri Feb 28, 2014 8:10 pm

Please move these posts to that thread (which was for the two-way ramp problem).
dbraughlr
 
Posts: 569
Joined: Tue Aug 13, 2013 2:24 am
Has thanked: 164 times
Been thanked: 98 times

Re: Saint versus Street

Postby sketch » Tue Jun 24, 2014 12:00 am

krikketdoug wrote:An idea for another invalid street name check, that might be workable...

I was out on a drive and I heard a couple of times at different streets, "Turn right on Street Charles Road". Kind of obvious what the problem was when I thought about it. St. is the abbreviation for Saint and Street.

Given that Street would only be used at the end of the street name, but Saint would be used after the directional (if any) and before the name, could Validator look for St in this context?

Just a thought.

I created the following check for this same problem.
Code: Select all
{street}
/(^|/ |[NEWS] |Rue )St /

This will highlight segments that begin with "St ", or that contain any of the following:
"/ St "
"N St " | "E St " | "W St " | "S St "
"Rue St "

I will post this in the US Validator thread also.
sketch
Waze Global Champs
Waze Global Champs
 
Posts: 5846
Joined: Sat Aug 08, 2009 6:13 pm
Location: New Orleans, LA
Has thanked: 1385 times
Been thanked: 1881 times

Re: Saint versus Street

Postby crazycaveman » Mon Jun 23, 2014 3:19 am

krikketdoug wrote:
berestovskyy wrote:
krikketdoug wrote:1> Walking trails and other non-drivable road types that have a elevation of something other than -5 be flagged.

You can use a custom check in Validator for that:
template: ${typeRank}:${elevation}
regexp: /^5:(?!-5)/


By chance is this one of those features linked to editor rank? I've looked about my system and haven't been able to find a way to do this.


If you're having trouble finding where to enter this, go to the Validator Settings (gear icon) and enter it in the appropriate boxes (first two) in the pane (labeled Custom template and Custom RegExp). It's not dependent on rank. See the Custom Checks examples for more info.

krikketdoug wrote:An idea for another invalid street name check, that might be workable...

I was out on a drive and I heard a couple of times at different streets, "Turn right on Street Charles Road". Kind of obvious what the problem was when I thought about it. St. is the abbreviation for Saint and Street.

Given that Street would only be used at the end of the street name, but Saint would be used after the directional (if any) and before the name, could Validator look for St in this context?

Just a thought.


This could be checked for with the following RegExp (should work, but untested; maybe someone can correct me if I'm wrong?):
Custom template: ${street}
Custom RegExp: /^St .*/i
crazycaveman
Country Manager
Country Manager
 
Posts: 702
Joined: Fri Sep 03, 2010 1:48 am
Location: Rock Hill, SC, USA
Has thanked: 237 times
Been thanked: 383 times

Re: road junctions and crossovers

Postby AlanOfTheBerg » Thu Feb 27, 2014 4:44 pm

irowiki wrote:... this whole thing started because I posted that the "out of range elevation" check was not working for me. I'm finding quite a few "blank" elevation segments, but every time I try to permalink one, it reverts to ground elevation. Perhaps it is just a visual bug?

Disable other extensions. I believe one of them, like JNF or Toolbox, masks this bug.
AlanOfTheBerg
Waze Global Champs
Waze Global Champs
 
Posts: 23587
Joined: Sat Aug 28, 2010 8:48 pm
Location: US Country Manager - Oregon, USA
Has thanked: 1123 times
Been thanked: 4770 times

Re: road junctions and crossovers

Postby irowiki » Thu Feb 27, 2014 4:02 pm

dbraughlr wrote:
berestovskyy wrote:So we're looking at quite slow and complex check here. But what's is the "goal"? Does this non-ground elevation affects TTS or routing?

I would be looking for drivable segments at the same elevation that touch or cross without forming a junction. These might look okay, but they do not route correctly.


That's pretty much it what I was looking for, however, this whole thing started because I posted that the "out of range elevation" check was not working for me. I'm finding quite a few "blank" elevation segments, but every time I try to permalink one, it reverts to ground elevation. Perhaps it is just a visual bug?
irowiki
 
Posts: 250
Joined: Tue Feb 11, 2014 3:05 pm
Has thanked: 68 times
Been thanked: 40 times

Re: road junctions and crossovers

Postby dbraughlr » Thu Feb 27, 2014 10:27 am

berestovskyy wrote:No doubt those buckets will reduce number of comparisons, but add complexity. And still there are will be thousands of comparisons and the check still will be very slow.

- a few thousand comparisons - not hundreds of thousands. But if it is too slow, make the squares smaller.
When the squares are under 25 m², the algorithm approaches Ο(n) time.

berestovskyy wrote:So we're looking at quite slow and complex check here. But what's is the "goal"? Does this non-ground elevation affects TTS or routing?

I would be looking for drivable segments at the same elevation that touch or cross without forming a junction. These might look okay, but they do not route correctly.
dbraughlr
 
Posts: 569
Joined: Tue Aug 13, 2013 2:24 am
Has thanked: 164 times
Been thanked: 98 times

Re: road junctions and crossovers

Postby Timbones » Thu Feb 27, 2014 10:24 am

berestovskyy wrote:Does this non-ground elevation affects TTS or routing?

No, it does not. Fixing these does not add any value to the map. Move along!
Timbones
Coordinators
Coordinators
 
Posts: 6676
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2011 10:33 am
Location: York, UK
Has thanked: 971 times
Been thanked: 2608 times

Re: road junctions and crossovers

Postby berestovskyy » Thu Feb 27, 2014 9:34 am

dbraughlr wrote:Create buckets to divide the map into equal sized squares, say 1 km².

Sure, I meant current map view not the whole map. On zoom levels 4-5 WME map view is about 1 km² in size.

dbraughlr wrote:For each segment on the map, determine which square(s) it crosses and add it (or a portion of it) to the bucket for those square(s).

No doubt those buckets will reduce number of comparisons, but add complexity. And still there are will be thousands of comparisons and the check still will be very slow.

So we're looking at quite slow and complex check here. But what's is the "goal"? Does this non-ground elevation affects TTS or routing?
berestovskyy
 
Posts: 925
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2011 1:50 pm
Has thanked: 254 times
Been thanked: 704 times

Re: road junctions and crossovers

Postby dbraughlr » Thu Feb 27, 2014 8:43 am

berestovskyy wrote:In both cases to check if a segment intersects with another, we have to compare it with every other segment on the map = very slow. Sorry, it won't be implemented unless we found another solution :(

Comparisons can be greatly pruned by segregating roads into smaller map squares. Roads which are completely confined to a small square need be checked only other roads which intersect the square it occupies. No segment needs to be checked against all others. Most segments need to be checked against only other roads in the local area.

Create buckets to divide the map into equal sized squares, say 1 km².

For each segment on the map, determine which square(s) it crosses and add it (or a portion of it) to the bucket for those square(s). Repeat until all segments are distributed to the buckets.

For each bucket, compare each segment (or portions of a segment) against all those segments in that bucket.
dbraughlr
 
Posts: 569
Joined: Tue Aug 13, 2013 2:24 am
Has thanked: 164 times
Been thanked: 98 times

Re: right turn should be allowed

Postby dbraughlr » Wed Apr 02, 2014 2:55 am

I was referring to the angle as measured from the current segment, not in degrees of turn.
So the angles I gave need to be subtracted from 180 to get degrees of right turn, e.g. 180° - 185° = -5° right turn (a turn slightly left of course).
dbraughlr
 
Posts: 569
Joined: Tue Aug 13, 2013 2:24 am
Has thanked: 164 times
Been thanked: 98 times

PreviousNext

Return to Addons, Extensions, and Scripts

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: abusimbel16, Baidu [Spider], edsonajj, fjsawicki