I know its not ideal but if you really wanted you could find the centre of the area you want to label and label a small section of road.

This would cover both bases

I couldn't agree more. This discussion/argument is at an impasse.

widen the net

http://world.waze.com/wiki/index.php/Ho ... Kingdom%29

City and County Naming

The City field should be used to specify the city, town or village for all the streets within it.
Rural roads that are in-between towns should be be left with No city.
Where possible, the simplest unique name should be used. In the case where two towns share the same name, the County can be added in brackets afterwards. For example, "Preston (Dorset)" would distinguish it from the city in Lancashire. It is preferable to have no suffix on whichever town is the larger or more well known.

I think you will find its a "city" field and not a "district" field

The question has been asked

http://world.waze.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=34519

I have wondered why waze made a mistake only giving us the "city field"

The conclusion I have come to is is waze was designed for a "base map" import and the editor was designed only to edit the "base map".

But us crazy kiwis are mapping the whole country from starch using limited tools.

Can somebody explain why the UK only ..

The City field should be used to specify the city, town or village for all the streets within it.
Rural roads that are in-between towns should be be left with No city.

http://world.waze.com/wiki/index.php/Ho ... Kingdom%29

Another example where an error occurs is Springfield in Northland which is also a city name in a few American States in this case the City Name is Springfield, Northland.

Im not sure I agree with this?

Its Springfield, New Zealand

New Zealand is already defined?

There should only be one Springfield city in NZ. e.g. "Palmerston" and "Palmerston North"

We know there are double ups on suburbs but they are part of cities.

Rural Areas
Roads in rural areas of New Zealand should have the city field populated with the name of the town, village or area in which the road lies. This applies to Freeways, Ramps, Major and Minor Highways, Primary Streets and Streets.
The appropriate name for any given road can be determined using other sources such as AA Maps (maps.aa.co.nz), Google maps (maps.google.com), or Council documentation if available.

Where a road extends across boundaries, change the City name at a nearby intersection if appropriate or split the road if necessary in order to change the name in the correct place. As an example of this, Ararimu Road begins in Ramarama, passes through Ararimu and ends in Paparimu. The City field is used to reflect the correct name for any given segment of the road.

Where the boundary of two areas follows the centre of a road, use one area in the City field and add the other area in an alternate City field, for searching and navigational purposes.

I currently disagree on this but im still in trial stage.

Because of the openness of waze im going to suggest we list both methods and let editors choose. Over time one will become more popular than the other?

I suspect that that wiki page is out of date based on a few things

Having said that it doesn't mean its wrong

Why did we need 4 of these?

In terms of page, I like the idea but im not sure how clear it is or that it covers enough detail.
How about something like this instead:

To aid in an easy to understand client display, if the street is visible at higher zoom levels (Primary and above) the City field should be used to only specify the city, town or village. However if the city had suburbs and the street is only visible at closer zoom levels (Standard and below) this field should be the suburb. An alternate name with the City field with the other value should be added to aid the searching of roads in that area.

Lets take Kamo, Whangarei as an example.

For all primary and above roads in the area:
Primary city: Whangarei
Alt city: Kamo

Standard roads or lower in the area:
Primary city: Kamo
Alt city: Whangarei


Excluding Motorways if a road is driven at open road speeds then it is classified as a rural road, and the Primary street details should have No City ticked, but an alternative name entered with the city which would be given in a postal address. There is no difference between Primary and Standard roads in this case.

Lets take a road on State Highway 3 as an example.

When not travelling on the Open Road (eg. when not travelling at 100kph):
Follow rules given above

When travelling ot the Open Road (eg. when the speed limit is 100kph):
Primary city: No City
Alt city: City name listed for postal purposes

We probably should work out what we do about province (Waikato, Far North...) as well, I dont think its really needed and just clutters up the map.

ive tweaked the formatting a little does that work any better.

finshona wrote:

Alt city: City name listed for postal purposes

Shouldn't that be for navigational purposes, why would anyone use Waze to work out someone's postal address?

Fair call, although how do you determine the navigational city name? People should know how to determine the postal address for a road and most people would give that city for the purpose of navigation.

finshona wrote:Where has the decision been formed that Rural areas are less important navigationally than urban areas. I am concerned that you are limiting wazes navigational functionality. I have been based most of my life in rural areas, most of my driving is still to rural areas. Personally I still think that pcp192's idea of putting the local area name in the city field is sensible and logical on the open rural roads.

Its not limiting the navigation of Waze, its making the client display urban areas correctly. The alt names are used for the navigating for a place. pcp's idea of having a city name against every primary name means that the client has no idea where the city/town actually is and can sometimes put it in the middle of a rural area.

If however an alt name is entered with the correct city name, the client will search the alt name as well and give the correct directions.

finshona wrote: Lets take Hunua as an example the postal address is RD 3, Papakura so am I going to put all the names in this area as Papakura? Oh even better how about Ararimu, half of it would be labled Papakura and the other half Drury. This makes no sense whatsoever.

I dont follow you here? What you seem to have suggested is that the primary road should be labelled one or the other but not both? Where is the road? If someone was to drive to it what would be the address you gave for them to drive to?

finshona wrote: I think more thought and discussion needs to be put into this decision and that other peoples views should be taken into account, not summarily dismissed as they don't agree with the writer.

I think you need to reread that topic as im not sure why you have decided that we don't agree with the writer, that was the whole reason I suggested using alt names. Nobody actually paid attention to the original suggestion of using alt names and flamed me for my thinking, when I pointed it out a second time, then it seemed like everyone was on the same page as it covered everyone's thoughts for display as well as navigation - Im really not sure why pcp then decided to go back on that and hasn't replied to suggest why.

As ispy has mentioned tho it is for comment, if you have a reason for why it shouldn't be done or doesnt work do chime in.