Road Types (USA) – comprehensive overhaul of drivable roads

[sketch]

I would imagine that where you start makes a difference, so if you're not already on an mH it might be pruned, but if you start on that mH it will be considered. (Also it'll necessarily be a shorter route from that point, but maybe that's not as important.)

[sketch]

Thortok, you're getting pruning and preferences confused.

Pruning is when a road is not considered at all for a long-distance route because its type is too low.

US-212 and US-89 are being pruned for >200 mi routes because they are not at least major highway. They weren't being given as routes at all, and now they are.

What you're saying is that Waze prefers Major Highways inordinately above other roads for shorter-distance routing. I have not found this to be the case, and it seems others haven't either, but even if it were true it would be representative of a different issue.

[sketch]

It probably isn't giving you alternatives because it hasn't found any alternatives that are actually faster. Sometimes sitting in rush hour traffic on the best route is still faster than taking some alternate route, sometimes it isn't.

Why isn't Waze "sticking to" the Major Highways here? The first route given using mostly Transcontinental (Minor) and W Esplanade (Minor) eschews a longer trip down Veterans (Major) for a route along Minors that saves one minute. The third route eschews both for a route mostly down a Primary Street (Kawanee). How about these routes, then — none of them uses Veterans (Major) significantly or the Interstate at all. The primary route relies on W Napoleon and Cleary, both minors, and the others use primarily some combination of Primary Streets and Streets.

The route between your home and your workplace is a short, straight shot down a Major Highway. It isn't even just your area, it's your origin and destination that define your experience. The three routes you get are the three best routes; I don't see any other route that would be better between your home and your workplace. Here's a route in your area where it would certainly be possible for Waze to "stick to" the Major Highway if it wanted to, but instead it takes you on a 1 minute shorter route down a Minor Highway. Here's another where Waze would be perfectly justified in "sticking to" the Major Highway, but it doesn't — the primary route along mostly Minors saves one or two minutes above the two alternative routes, both of which combine Major and Minor.

So yes, I believe your experience is simply different. I would expect a similar experience for someone who lives and works here and here. But even still, routes from one point near a Major to another point near the same Major don't always "stick to" that Major and might even ignore it depending on Waze's traffic data, which is pretty good here.

If you haven't looked for other routes, how would you know if better routes actually exist? Keep driving and see what happens. Take some of those routes you think are better a few times if you think Waze should consider them. Take note of whether or not they are actually faster than the three routes Waze suggests. You said you don't have a huge Wazer base in your area, so make that data yourself. See what happens. I don't know that anything's going to change on your route, but you won't know unless you try.

[sketch]

Where was that first example? How did you fix it?

Memphis to Gulf Shores is a long distance route. That's a pruning problem, not a preference problem. It has nothing to do with "overclassification" in urban areas. What you're telling me is that upgrading the roads to meet this standard actually fixed the routing.

Yes, Waze could "fix" the routing system by allowing long routes over minor highways. (Fat chance.) Or, we could fix the Waze map to provide Major Highways for long routes, which is what we're trying to do.

[sketch]

Well, like I said, the more you drive, the better it gets. Historical and live traffic data combine to make Waze very useful in New Orleans. It took a couple years to get that way, sure, but the install base is a lot bigger now.

Maybe pruning long distance routes is a bug, maybe it's by design. Either way, we can fix it now, or we can hope and wait that Waze maybe might change it in the future. I'd rather not wait.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk 2

[sketch]

I can understand, it's a lot of work. But it's also a lot of editing points to be had and a good excuse to scan the map for errors in less-traveled places.

Plus, US-89, US-31, and US-212 are not the only places where it's needed, they're just the only ones that have been brought up as problematic so far. Uniform implementation could help a lot of drivers in places editors don't travel.

The new system isn't just there to compensate for pruning, remember, it also serves to improve local routing, and to make concrete a previously-nebulous standard.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk 2

[sketch]

That'd be great, but I'm actually not sure it'd be possible both to do that and to keep a meaningful "avoid freeways" option—because states are inconsistent. Some put both freeways and expressways in the "other freeways and expressways" category, others just show the class as "other freeways" and classify expressways as "principal arterials".


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk 2

[sketch]

A lot of the text in the wiki is old and has survived revisions without comment. It's really pruning we're trying to avoid, in case a roundabout is in the middle of a route. Same as at-grade connectors.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk 2

[sketch]

I tried all the examples from [url=https://www.waze.com/livemap/?zoom=15&lat=45.78328&lon=-108.50068&from_lat=44.08054&from_lon=-103.23101&to_lat=45.78329&to_lon=-108.50069]this post plus the route from Rapid City, SD to Billings, MT with the routing test, but all the results were the same in every case.

[sketch]

No, good idea though. I will do that now. Hopefully the "infrastructural changes" take a little longer, long enough for Shirli to review.