[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: right turn should be allowed

Postby dbraughlr » Tue Apr 01, 2014 11:06 pm

sketch wrote:What do you mean by "up to 85°"? I would think it should apply for any angle (45º < angle ≤ 90º); i.e., any that would give a "turn right" instruction.

Ignoring the detail that departure angles from too sharp all the way to <135º give a "turn right" instruction, I still think that the point is that a turn should be expected to be allowed to any road between, say 45º and wherever the best continuation is.

In short, a road which merely requires "stay right" still should have its turn enabled- at least this is what I was expecting. So if the road bears hard left, a turn of straight ahead should be expected to be permitted even if 185º.

I think another way if saying this is that any road that can be reached without crossing traffic is the opposing direction, why is the turn not allowed?
(Yes, bypass roads like AGCs are such examples. I'm not asking. I'm just saying that this is the essence of the question that the validation asks.)
Last edited by dbraughlr on Tue Apr 01, 2014 11:16 pm, edited 1 time in total.
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 sketch » Tue Apr 01, 2014 3:18 pm

berestovskyy wrote:Ok, how about that:
2. No right* turn (for any drivable road)
* for the right-hand traffic
Report/highlight the segment if at the node:
a) there is an up to 85° right turn
a1) and either this segment OR that right turn segment is longer than 300m (~1000 ft)
b) and that right turn segment is also drivable and non-private
c) and that right turn segment is not marked as closed
d) and the connectivity between those two segments is possible (road directions), but not enabled

Would that new a1) condition be sufficient to detect connectors and other possible exceptions?

a1) seems like it would be sufficient.

What do you mean by "up to 85°"? I would think it should apply for any angle (45º < angle ≤ 90º); i.e., any that would give a "turn right" instruction.
sketch
Waze Global Champs
Waze Global Champs
 
Posts: 5852
Joined: Sat Aug 08, 2009 6:13 pm
Location: New Orleans, LA
Has thanked: 1389 times
Been thanked: 1883 times

Re: right turn should be allowed

Postby berestovskyy » Tue Apr 01, 2014 6:18 am

sketch wrote:Wait, I have a problem with the "no right turn" check. Wouldn't it call for erroneous enabling of turns like the right turn from this segment?


Ok, how about that:
2. No right* turn (for any drivable road)
* for the right-hand traffic
Report/highlight the segment if at the node:
a) there is an up to 85° right turn
a1) and either this segment OR that right turn segment is longer than 300m (~1000 ft)
b) and that right turn segment is also drivable and non-private
c) and that right turn segment is not marked as closed
d) and the connectivity between those two segments is possible (road directions), but not enabled

Would that new a1) condition be sufficient to detect connectors and other possible exceptions?

BellHouse wrote:I don't get the idea behind 2.

The idea is that in right-hand traffic countries the right non-acute turns are mostly enabled except some rare situations. So we can assume that disabled right turn is an error.
berestovskyy
 
Posts: 925
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2011 1:50 pm
Has thanked: 254 times
Been thanked: 704 times

Re: right turn should be allowed

Postby AlanOfTheBerg » Tue Apr 01, 2014 3:33 am

sketch wrote:Wait, I have a problem with the "no right turn" check. Wouldn't it call for erroneous enabling of turns like the right turn from this segment?

You are correct, sketch. In fact, it would/could erroneously highlight any junction/segment for which there exists a right-turn at-grade connector. If it is possible to look back one segment and find a "sister" segment which junctions the same segment for which the right turn is enabled, then it could ignore the first. However, I feel this type of check may be fraught with all number of exceptions that we can't think of at this time.
AlanOfTheBerg
Waze Global Champs
Waze Global Champs
 
Posts: 23590
Joined: Sat Aug 28, 2010 8:48 pm
Location: US Country Manager - Oregon, USA
Has thanked: 1124 times
Been thanked: 4773 times

Re: right turn should be allowed

Postby sketch » Mon Mar 31, 2014 9:29 pm

Wait, I have a problem with the "no right turn" check. Wouldn't it call for erroneous enabling of turns like the right turn from this segment?

dbraughlr wrote:
berestovskyy wrote:2. No right* turn (for any drivable road)
* for the right-hand traffic
Report/highlight the segment if at the node:
a) there is a 90±5° right turn

Why not any segment between 80° and the continuation segment or 180° whichever is less?
Of course, when the continuation segment is <80°, it is the right turn.

The operative angle for determining the difference between turn and stay/exit/continue is 45°. Past that, I'm not really sure what you're saying. Are you suggesting right turns should be enabled for 170° turns?
sketch
Waze Global Champs
Waze Global Champs
 
Posts: 5852
Joined: Sat Aug 08, 2009 6:13 pm
Location: New Orleans, LA
Has thanked: 1389 times
Been thanked: 1883 times

Re: right turn should be allowed

Postby dbraughlr » Mon Mar 31, 2014 8:53 pm

berestovskyy wrote:2. No right* turn (for any drivable road)
* for the right-hand traffic
Report/highlight the segment if at the node:
a) there is a 90±5° right turn

Why not any segment between 80° and the continuation segment or 180° whichever is less?
Of course, when the continuation segment is <80°, it is the right turn.
dbraughlr
 
Posts: 569
Joined: Tue Aug 13, 2013 2:24 am
Has thanked: 164 times
Been thanked: 98 times

Re: report rerun

Postby dbraughlr » Tue Mar 25, 2014 6:08 pm

The results should update dynamically when you change elements. Otherwise, press the χ icon to delete old results.
dbraughlr
 
Posts: 569
Joined: Tue Aug 13, 2013 2:24 am
Has thanked: 164 times
Been thanked: 98 times

Re: ReferenceError: WazeEditorURL is not defined

Postby berestovskyy » Thu Feb 20, 2014 6:52 am

dbraughlr wrote:After saving my edits, I often see multiple occurrences of ReferenceError: WazeEditorURL is not defined on the JS console.

I guess it's not related to Validator since there is no "WazeEditorURL" in my code.
There is a script name next to the error on the console...
berestovskyy
 
Posts: 925
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2011 1:50 pm
Has thanked: 254 times
Been thanked: 704 times

Re: ramp type for at-grade connector

Postby dbraughlr » Tue Feb 18, 2014 5:50 am

CBenson wrote:These segments have been ramps for quite some time and I've never found enough of a reason to change them.

Yes, those should fail validation. Then someone would have a good reason to change them if the wiki is not reason enough.
dbraughlr
 
Posts: 569
Joined: Tue Aug 13, 2013 2:24 am
Has thanked: 164 times
Been thanked: 98 times

Re: ramp as non-highway connector

Postby kentsmith9 » Sat Feb 22, 2014 10:03 pm

CBenson wrote:
dbraughlr wrote:
kentsmith9 wrote:Unless someone can identify the problem

Simply put, there is not Road Type for connectors below the class of highways (freeways, MH, mH).
...

Maybe this discussion should be split from this thread again, but I disagree with this statement. The guidance in the US, as noted above, is that ramps are to be used for grade separated connections. We could discuss changes, but "highway function" is term that we can endlessly debate. Again we should likely have that debate elsewhere.

If I understand dbraughlr's comment, he is not saying there is a problem with the current use of Ramps that the validator should prevent, but is proposing a change be made in the future. Therefore the Validator should allow ramps to connect between two Streets or Primary Streets as well as the Highway class types since they do exist in real life and do not cause routing problems.
kentsmith9
Waze Global Champs
Waze Global Champs
 
Posts: 5209
Joined: Mon Apr 23, 2012 3:33 pm
Location: SF/SJ Bay Area of Northern California
Has thanked: 1329 times
Been thanked: 1568 times

PreviousNext

Return to Addons, Extensions, and Scripts

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: grauztilv_tt, Olestas