Get a sneak peek at whats next for Permanent Hazards on our April 7th Office Hours!
Post by nzhook
Not a bad way of handling it, it simplifies it a bit more which in turn lessons the chance of a new user not knowing.

How many of the towns/cities would we want to include on the map at that level dont have a state highway running thru them?

Its still also based on the city layer showing as expected, it would however reduce the size of a city and may in some cases put the centre in the wrong place (eg. if a state highway is pulls away before the centre) but as long as its not a major discrepancy it probably wouldnt be too noticeable.
nzhook
Posts: 132
Has thanked: 3 times
Been thanked: 12 times
Send a message
Area Manager - Taranaki, New Zealand
Samsung Galaxy Ace (GT-S5830) - Gingerbread (Andriod 2.3.5)
New Zealand - Waze Client Beta Tester

Post by nzhook
Firstly, I think the rule should be if its your not driving at the Open road speed of 100kph then the name is used. A lot of towns have 60, 70 and 80kph speed limits which then break the rules.
finshona wrote:Actually I don't believe Maramarua has a 50km/h zone either, though I could be wrong about that one, I haven't driven down every road out there. So you might have to wait till you get to Matamata before you actually find yourself somewhere.

So to solve the problem of Patea being in the wrong place we will lose a huge number of areas altogether, great solution :lol:
Waze only uses ONE way to determine an urban area from a rural area, which is using the No City flag. If you have another way of showing the urban areas like other GPS devices (tomtom, navman, google maps...) do then feel free to suggest it. Currently the proposal for rural is:
No City BUT An alt name with the areas name in the city field is required.
This then shows the rural area as not being built up, allows for searching for the road in the area and the returned search results do show the name. Unfortunately however it doesnt show the area name on the map, just the roads name.

Im also sure that if Waze changes the way they determine the urban areas then people will be happy to change the map.
nzhook
Posts: 132
Has thanked: 3 times
Been thanked: 12 times
Send a message
Area Manager - Taranaki, New Zealand
Samsung Galaxy Ace (GT-S5830) - Gingerbread (Andriod 2.3.5)
New Zealand - Waze Client Beta Tester

Post by nzhook
Wow hot topic, in the time I wrote that there were 5 more posts.
nzhook
Posts: 132
Has thanked: 3 times
Been thanked: 12 times
Send a message
Area Manager - Taranaki, New Zealand
Samsung Galaxy Ace (GT-S5830) - Gingerbread (Andriod 2.3.5)
New Zealand - Waze Client Beta Tester

Post by nzhook
No fixing Patea was a caused by people who named the whole road and dont actually pay attention to how much they are naming. Much like Waitomo.

The urban thing has always been my main concern (ive refereed to it in many ways, such as City layer)
nzhook
Posts: 132
Has thanked: 3 times
Been thanked: 12 times
Send a message
Area Manager - Taranaki, New Zealand
Samsung Galaxy Ace (GT-S5830) - Gingerbread (Andriod 2.3.5)
New Zealand - Waze Client Beta Tester

Post by nzhook
pcp192 wrote:
nzhook wrote:No fixing Patea was a caused by people who named the whole road and dont actually pay attention to how much they are naming. Much like Waitomo.
In that case the solution isn't to remove the name altogether, it's making sure the correct name is used isn't it?
Yup, agreed if names are right 'that' problem wont happen. But then what about these new map editors who follow what they see, which name would they use.

Lets stop the fighting and go back and list what we are trying to do with the rural areas then we can focus on which options fix all the points (or at least as many as possible):
- Urban/Rural boxes
- Easy to follow wiki Instructions
- Place names in the correct place
- Showing town/city/area names against all roads while driving
- Ability to add in areas not currently mapped out
Have I missed anything?
pcp192 wrote:
nzhook wrote:The urban thing has always been my main concern (ive refereed to it in many ways, such as City layer)
Our solution earlier on the urban display is probably going to work really well - I'm updating a number of suburbs around Auckland to be able to prove that one way or another. So much of Auckland had all roads labelled 'Auckland' in the city so getting the suburb names correct is going to make a huge difference on the map. Keeping 'Auckland' on the Highway roads should keep the city name visible at higher levels.
Yeah, that urban city layer should look really good, the urban display against rural roads wont tho :(

I really do wish Waze had the ablity to draw that layer, then it wouldnt be a problem. We could have city names everywhere and we wouldnt need to have this discussion.
nzhook
Posts: 132
Has thanked: 3 times
Been thanked: 12 times
Send a message
Area Manager - Taranaki, New Zealand
Samsung Galaxy Ace (GT-S5830) - Gingerbread (Andriod 2.3.5)
New Zealand - Waze Client Beta Tester

Post by nzhook
First. Is current Waze client display, see screenshots here: http://world.waze.com/forum/viewtopic.p ... 20#p309848 and you can compare this to something like Google which does a similar thing: https://maps.google.com/maps?ll=-37.809 ... m&hl=en-GB (note the slightly darker colour around the built up/urban area, most navigation devices ive used do this) - This is the layer I was saying about drawing, currently its automatic based on that one field.

Last. Taking Waitomo as the example. It appears that when someone mapped out Otorohanga they didnt take into account Waitomo sitting in the middle. So the whole of SH3 between Te Kuiti and Otorohanga was marked as Otorohanga, then someone came in and added Waitomo but didnt update SH3 so the areas are wrong as Otorohanga shouldn't end at Te Kuiti.
: http://world.waze.com/livemap/?q=Waitom ... yers=BTTTT
or https://world.waze.com/editor/?lon=175. ... =184241585
While im sure Ispy has done a lot of New Zealand, theres plenty of areas I keep finding where the area is not fully mapped out yet, so we need to make sure that its easy to extend without causing a mis-reported area.


And as I mentioned in my other post, 50k is not a good indicator of a town/city as that would drop off the 'towns' which only drop to 70k or even areas like Hamilton where its 60k, a better value would be areas which are not Open Road speed as defined by the NZTA (eg < 100kph) and for those local drivers they can normally find that really easily
nzhook
Posts: 132
Has thanked: 3 times
Been thanked: 12 times
Send a message
Area Manager - Taranaki, New Zealand
Samsung Galaxy Ace (GT-S5830) - Gingerbread (Andriod 2.3.5)
New Zealand - Waze Client Beta Tester

Post by nzhook
pcp192 wrote: If we agree on the above, then do we agree there are two options for naming in rural areas:
1. Use the city field in all circumstances
2. Use the city field only where a 50km/h speed limit applies, with Alt city used to aid searching.
At the moment those are the two main ones that have been raised. Ispy did suggest a small segment in an area to show other area names (thats also a question are we talking actual towns, or just area names?)

However there maybe others, maybe we should look at what other countries are doing to cover the issues being raised, as having only two seems to be causing a flame war.
pcp192 wrote: If agreed on the possible solutions, lets work through each one and assess against the requirements.
I've started a spreadsheet to get the assessment in one place -

Feel free to edit, add comments etc
Good idea, however im not sure it can currently capture everyone's view or the pros and cons against each side easily. I dont want to change the structure without people understanding why ive done it, so would this format be a little better: (hope the formatting makes sense, would be nice to have tables here)

Code: Select all

Requirement...                          Pros                 Cons
  XYZ
     Option A                               pro 1               con 1
                                           pro 2               con 2
     Option B                               pro 1               con 1
                                            pro 2               con 2
  MNO
     Option A                               pro 1                con 1
                                            pro 2
     Option B                               pro 1                con 1
                                                                  con 2

Heres my thoughts on the options, plus replies to what is in there currently, hope they read correctly in this format:
- Urban/Rural boxes
Always: Client displays triangular boxes joining all roads
(Con): While not a major, it doesnt compare with professional applications where urban areas are shown in this way, this may then cause people to not understand what its trying to do and turn them away.
No City: Client uses this to determine the correct place for these boxes
(Pro) The way the client is designed
Current comment from spreadsheet: ?
My Comment:

- Easy to follow wiki Instructions
Always: One generic section with notes about naming, plus instructions on how and where to break a segment so that areas are followed as defined without causing smudges.
(con) New users who dont read the wiki would enter potentially incorrect information for rural areas.
No City: Require splitting roads into two sections Rural and Urban.
(pro/con) We would already have to do this for the new Urban rules.
(pro) New users who dont read the wiki should be able to figure out what to do easily (even if they dont add alt names)
Current comment from spreadsheet: (con) "Hard to know where a 50kn/h speed limit exists in rural areas
Having differnet rules in differernt scenarios is harder to explain and follow."
My Comment: Most people who have driven the road will know if they were driving 100k at that point, 100k may also not be a good gauge for this when your not driving the area, I know when ive mapped out areas ive used aerials and stopped when the built up areas seem to end (although thats harder to explain), maybe we should leave the when urban stops and rural starts until we determine the route we take and start writing instructions.
(pro) We already have different rules for Urban areas.

- Place names in the correct place
Always: Depends on how well the areas are broken up, town names may appear slightly off but should be close.
No City: Should be very close to where they need to be
Current comment from spreadsheet: "How important is this/ Is it for routing or display purposes? Do we need to be able to route to a town without entering a road name? (given current limitations of waze)"
My Comment: For both, I route to Town names (when I can spell them), then once im there I take a look around and then navigate somewhere else. I would also like to be able to find near by towns based on the map - this one is really the same as suburb/city which we discussed for Urban.

- Showing town/city/area names against all roads while driving
Always: (pro) Yes
No City: (con) Not for rural roads
Current comment from spreadsheet: ""
My Comment: I would like to see this supported as its a good idea, but I know im on Dudley road I may not know which Dudley road. However searching for nearby things should hopefully return something that tells me where I am or lets me find my way back.

- Ability to add in areas not currently mapped out
Always:
(pro) if people are following wiki instructions and update roads after the new area is added/fixed.
(con) City smudges may occur if people add areas but dont update the surrounding roads as they should be
No City: Can untick No City, and enter new name,
(pro) Tolerant if surrounding roads are not un-ticked
Current comment from spreadsheet: ""
My reply: Ive had to fix this a number of times in Taranaki, where there is no satellite imagery and whole towns were forgotten (Inglewood and Eltham were examples of this)
nzhook
Posts: 132
Has thanked: 3 times
Been thanked: 12 times
Send a message
Area Manager - Taranaki, New Zealand
Samsung Galaxy Ace (GT-S5830) - Gingerbread (Andriod 2.3.5)
New Zealand - Waze Client Beta Tester

Post by nzhook
pcp192 wrote:The principal of keeping it simple is paramount and should be followed at all times. At the end of the day, the proposal from nzhook and ispyisail is anything but simple.
Im not sure how its not simple. If you are driving at 100k, its No City.
Your trying to get people to work out where a city boundary/suburb/area is, split the road at the boundary and put the appropriate name in that place. (feel free to let me know it if ive misinterpreted what you want)

Maybe ill change my tact, since the argument seems to be over if the name of an area shows up (at all) on the map and then follows you while driving can you tell us why that is important? If we know the reasoning then there maybe a way to do it (which maybe the way you want), but currently Im sitting on the No City option as I don't really know the reasons so cant find a solution to fit.
nzhook
Posts: 132
Has thanked: 3 times
Been thanked: 12 times
Send a message
Area Manager - Taranaki, New Zealand
Samsung Galaxy Ace (GT-S5830) - Gingerbread (Andriod 2.3.5)
New Zealand - Waze Client Beta Tester

Post by nzhook
Antmannz wrote:Correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought this err.... discussion began because Patea was not centred on the actual urban area on the Live Map on the website.
Where has this obsession with Patea came from?

This topic was about what the wiki should say so if people found it they would know what to do, No City has been discussed in previous topics like this one:
http://world.waze.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=122&t=30542
Another thing ive noticed is a lot of the country roads (including state highways) are marked as a city, this actually doesnt work very well in the client or the maps as the overlays make it look like a badly formatted triangle and city names hover over the wrong area, I think where its out in the 100k zone, we should tick the No City option.
You could possibly get Patea from here:
http://world.waze.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=122&t=31851
I disagree with this, its fine in places like Auckland where everything is very connected, but once you start going out into the rest of New Zealand the client starts doing weird stuff, for example the middle of the town/city is the middle of all the roads that have that name. And recently ive found largish (50k) towns that are in the middle of nowhere because the city name had the name on the small road.

On top of that as ive mentioned in the other thread when people are setting the city, its based on 'ive just done this one', and everything in between doesnt exist until someone fixes it. For example Taranaki had a lot of places like this, Inglewood, Eltham, Midhurst, Patea, even Hawera were all listed as the incorrect towns because someone had done a town/city before it, entered the name and then when someone else came along they didnt update the field. At least if its set as No City it wont cause what the forum calls a City Smudge.
However the first real mention of Patea being in the wrong place was in this topic when we started talking about No City again. Like many of the problems, ive already mentioned Patea was just another problem that has been caused by not using the No City field.
nzhook
Posts: 132
Has thanked: 3 times
Been thanked: 12 times
Send a message
Area Manager - Taranaki, New Zealand
Samsung Galaxy Ace (GT-S5830) - Gingerbread (Andriod 2.3.5)
New Zealand - Waze Client Beta Tester

Post by nzhook
(Ive broken this into two posts as the Patea one was quite long by itself)
Antmannz wrote: For me, the Live Map is a guide only; it's what is shown in the client that matters most, and in the client the City Name moves about to accommodate your position, and whatever road names and other gui elements are being displayed.
It only does that in some conditions, for instance zoom out in the client, navigate to a town/city (you would end up in the middle of nowhere), or change the setting to be based on distance rather than speed (where zoom applies).
Antmannz wrote: IMO, setting the City Name according to road speed is pure nonsense; it requires a greater knowledge of the locality being edited and is likely to require more frequent updating. Additionally, as detailed in earlier posts, areas may just disappear off the map.
Waze has 1 mile limitation for a reason, people cannot edit an area without driving it. The only people who get away with this excuse would be AMs and CM's and then other questions should be asked.

How are we going to fix the other missing area names? Should we actually be entering a city of: 'Waiongana, Inglewood, Taranaki, North Island', or maybe 'Gumtown, Kamo, Whangarei, North Island'? Which of these 'areas' are not important?
Antmannz wrote: It's unlikely that new editors (which are likely 'transient' anyway) will read the forum or wiki here, they'll just start editing so any sort of decision re rural city naming I think needs to be simple enough that it would closely match what a newbie would do.
Agreed, Most people I know dont just jump in and change everything without looking at what is there first? But how does a newbie know that City means 'Area'? Or that the tick box that says 'No City' shouldnt be used?

The question comes down to what ever option we decide on needs to be written down in the wiki page so people who actually do read it (or we can at least point people at it) can find the correct information to go in the field.

If you can write the wording for any of the options then please post it here, remembering that we are trying for a simple approach so it needs to cover how to find the information.

I have two versions for the No City:
1. For a rural area (normally where the speed limit is 100k/ph) tick 'No City'
OR 2. For sections which are not built up with housing tick 'No City'

Heres a couple of attempts for always having a city (im sure one of the people who are pro this option can word this better than me):
1. Where city/town is not applicable determine the boundary of an area by using Google maps or council documentation, if the road falls within two areas, break the road at the boundary. Enter the area name into the city field.
OR 2. Determine the area which the segment falls in, the road should be split if it falls within two areas. Areas can normally be determined by using local council documentation or using Google maps.

Ive also left out that the use of Google maps violates there term and conditions, and that Alt names should be used as for a newbie they wouldnt know that anyway.
nzhook
Posts: 132
Has thanked: 3 times
Been thanked: 12 times
Send a message
Area Manager - Taranaki, New Zealand
Samsung Galaxy Ace (GT-S5830) - Gingerbread (Andriod 2.3.5)
New Zealand - Waze Client Beta Tester