Thank you all for the initial interest and great questions!
We will make sure to circle back and address all of them next week!

 

Hi All, 

Thank you so much for the interest, the suggestions and the amazing questions!!! 


Sorry for the delay, it took a bit more than expected to answer all of them. 

1.

Perhaps  a "Map suggestion" based not only on Gmaps, but also on GPS tracks where there are no close segments would be nice.

 We will explore more sources for map suggestions, one of them can definitely be based on Waze data.

2.

Any way to make it two way?

Also would be nice if they gave credit to us in GM so that they realize we are knowledgeable contributors for improving their maps too. 

In this first phase the idea is to test map suggestions of missing segments coming from Google and validated by the editor community. 
We are already providing segments data to Google and they have been using it to update their map.

Only your edit suggestions will be shared with the Google operation’s team. Your personal information will not be shared since your privacy is important to us. Therefore we won’t be able to credit your edit in Google Maps.. We will make sure to credit and thank the editors, assign extra points for those edits and recognize them in the Waze community for their efforts in improving our map. We are currently thinking of creating a dedicated scoreboard for this feature similar to Mapraids one.

3.

They are actually going to acknowledge and converse with us? I hope this works as well as everyone hopes.

We are currently still defining the feedback loop, the editor will be able to add a rejection reason,  and the operator will gather all the needed information in order to apply the change to google map and refine the suggestion mechanism.

4.

This idea seems great.  I think that using not only google maps, but other sources as a reference is a must have feature. My suggestion would be to allow us to be able to sort the list based on the rank required to approve the suggestion, so we do not see things that we cannot approve.

Another suggestion of mine would be to somehow get a source from Google...

We are currently still defining the permission system, we do agree that it will be really important to show only relevant suggestions to each editor.

The main source of validation should definitely be the satellite imagery and street view in WME. Thank you for the suggestion. We will look into additional ways to help you evaluate suggestions efficiently.

5.

Part of this problem rests with out-of-date satellite imagery.

Another significant issue remains with some Google address points being prioritized over Waze HNs or even RPPs. This issue must be resolved ASAP because Waze looks bad even though it is not responsible for the problem. 

We are working in collaboration with Google to update satellite and aerial imagery on demand and much quicker for Waze, based on the editors’ request.

We have improved a lot lately with our search experience. Whenever Waze will have a full location address (for example, a full house address with a house number) it will be preferred over the Google one in autocomplete. If you have specific examples please feel free to report them in Centercode and the team will review and investigate.

6.

Map Suggestions sounds like a great idea if it works well. 
WME to become the new Google Map Maker?

That’s the idea of this initial phase, test the flow and the tool, thanks to your feedback, to make sure it will work well for you and will succeed to improve both the maps.

On the contrary Google sees a lot of value in Waze’s uniqueness, understands that this is derived from our awesome community and this feature will leverage your hyperlocal knowledge to improve the  Waze map. The WME & Waze are here to stay. 

7.

At the moment I prefer not to make any comments : google did exactly the same trial in Italy in a small area in 2014 .

... I hope this time Google will use a little bit “more brain “ in suggesting missed segments !

As outlined by other editors, those are only suggestions.
No data will be added to the Waze map without the validation of an editor.

The mechanism generating those map suggestions is way more advanced than the one used in early imports. On top of it we will pre-filter a lot, so that only relevant suggestions will reach the editors.

8.

I am not against that ,but in a country like Italy GMaps has any value to add to Waze Map

In the early tests we did we found helpful input also for mature countries, what was different was the volume of suggestions. 
Mature countries have a  lot of rural areas that could be improved, as explained those will be only one type of suggestion and we are exploring additional types. 

9.

If editor doesn't want improve Google Map, He should decline all suggestions?
Correct? 

In my country Waze have only two advantages - accuracy and speed of map updates, speed cameras. If all these changes will move to the GM, any normal users will use Waze.

In the initial phase we will surface segments that are present in Google Maps but missing in Waze. After validating the suggestion, if accepted by the editor the segment will be added to the Waze Map. 
If rejected the editor will be able to provide the reason and help improve also Google Maps accuracy. 

All editing is volunteer based, if an editor doesn’t want to look at suggestions is totally fine. At the same time like all editing should be based on facts and reflect the reality on the ground.

The feature aims to make the Waze map even more accurate and strengthen its uniqueness.

10.

I hope this will appear in a specific layer that can be disabled. Because in some regions forgotten by GMap, but with an active waze community, Waze map is by far more accurate than GMap. 

As explained the plan is to introduce map suggestions as part of the Issue Tracker and editors will be able to enable/disable those types of suggestions. In the early iterations we might add them as a simple layer and you will have the capability to enable/disable.

11.

...what about sharing the traffic data (not the alert, but the actual segment average speeds…) having both together would add a lot of accuracy for ETA calculation.

We already have a mechanism in place to share traffic data between the two platforms to increase accuracy. This was shared in the NA mega meetup and will be shared in upcoming meetups.

 
 
Thank you, 
Ruben on behalf the Map Squad
 
 

kumiankka wrote: ↑Thu May 26, 2022 10:04 am

Vespucci41 wrote: ↑Thu May 12, 2022 10:04 am A mechanism will pre-filter suggestions coming in, avoiding spam, and making sure only the most relevant information will be presented to editors for review. An example is that we will be filtering out off-roads, private roads and less relevant types at the beginning to let you focus on the highest impact roads, but we are planning to add them in a later stage.Screen Shot 2022-05-12 at 13.00.22.pngThose are mockups and subject to change.
 

Here in Finland a large majority of the missing roads consist of small and unpaved yet driveable roads in the rural areas of the country. So, the filtering them out might actually do more harm than good.
 
 

 

Thank you for the input and feedback!
 

Cool feature - looking forward to how this will work.

I am about 2-3 weeks away an effort for having all Vermont E911 roads confirmed mapped in WME.  In working off of pin maps I've generated for that purpose I have noticed Google Maps has a LOT of problems, including incorrectly named segments, roads in wrong places and roads that should not exist.  I gave up trying to update GM, as I was having about a 50% success rate, and with the sheer number of edits I have done in WME I just didn't have time to address GM.

As mentioned above, I think there would be value in having this work in the reverse direction: have GM get updates from WME.