CBenson wrote:A couple of thoughts.
1) I didn't say they weren't roundabounts, just that they weren't worth mapping.
Perhaps not to you.
2) Although yielding to the traffic is a consideration, its not a universal quality of traffic circles. There are certainly urban signaled circles where "at the roundabout take the second exit" is a useful instruction, but the traffic in the circle doesn't have any right-of-way over the traffic entering the circle as the entries are all signaled.
Actually, one of the defining characteristics of the modern roundabout is that traffic entering yields to traffic already in the circle unless otherwise marked (at least, within the USA; obviously, I can't speak regarding other countries). (By "otherwise marked," I mean that there will be signs in the circle directing traffic to yield to the entering traffic.) A "modern roundabout" is a type of looping junction in which road traffic travels in one direction around a central island and priority is given to the circulating flow. Signs usually direct traffic entering the circle to slow and to yield the right of way. See this document from the Federal Highway Administration for further information.
I even found the following image that kind-of illustrates the whole roundabout thing:
[ img ]
While it's true that US dictionaries use "roundabout" and "traffic circle" as synonyms, in technical terms, they're different.
Common distinctions between modern roundabouts and older rotary type intersections:
Typically, modern roundabouts are:
- smaller than rotaries
- designed for slower entry, circulating, and exit speeds
- always following a “yield-at-entry” traffic control principle
- designed with a raised splitter island to slow and deflect traffic prior to entry
- designed to facilitate safer pedestrian crossings
- designed to follow a same lane entry/lane exit principle at multilane roundabouts (NO LANE CHANGES in the circulatory roadway)
Signalized Traffic Circles are NOT Roundabouts. As an example, Dupont Circle in Washington DC is not a roundabout, it's a Traffic Circle with signals (I.E. a Signalized Traffic Circle).
As with anything in life, there are bound to be exceptions to the above - however, they're just that: Exceptions, not the rule.
I realize that this is possibly going beyond the scope of what needs to be considered from a Waze "mapping it" standpoint, but I feel that the point needs to be made - after all, we're talking about mapping roundabouts and whether or not the Validator should be annoying us with non-warning about a two-entering road roundabout. (Also, I felt that the distinction between the two should be pointed out, even if the map software doesn't give us a way to map them differently.)
I'm sure there are those who might say that there's no difference from a mapping standpoint since we only have a "Add Roundabout" function within the WME. I expect you're probably one of them. However, if a distinction needed to be made, I'm thinking that for those editors who have the Toolbox installed, the "Change roundabout to standard road" (which would still be a one-way circular road) tool could help with that and thus a signalized traffic circle could be represented that way. I'm not advocating this; just suggesting it as a possibility if it were felt important enough to treat them differently in the map.
CBenson wrote:SuperDave1426 wrote:One question, though, and I didn't see an answer to this the last time we were discussing it: You had indicated that in the past you've seen that to be the case. Is it, in fact, still the case now? Have you seen any recent occurrences of whatever the problem behavior is that you've seen? It could very well be that it's already been fixed.
I have not seen recent occurrences, so roundabouts may now be treated differently with regard to this issue.
Then can I make the request that when you're arguing against two-road roundabouts that you drop that as a reason? If it's no longer happening, then it seems to me that it's no longer a valid reason to use in a "do it or not" type of consideration. But maybe that's just me.