Wiki page suggestion: Landmarks

Moderators: krankyd, Unholy

Re: Wiki page suggestion: Landmarks

Postby Riamus » Wed Sep 25, 2013 5:23 pm

On the subject of landmarks, is there any opinion on waste transfer stations? These are places where you might drop of recycle items or trash and where waste is sorted. Map, don't map? If we map them, what landmark would be used? Government building considering it's typically a county owned site? Considering these are places where the public can usually drop things off, having them marked seems like it could be of use. Along the same lines, there are also town dumps where you can drop trash off. Any opinions on either of these types of locations?
ImageImage
Area Manager: Michigan - Northern LP.
Waze running on Samsung Galaxy S3.
Riamus
 
Posts: 1043
Joined: Sun May 05, 2013 7:34 pm
Location: Summerfield, NC
Has thanked: 66 times
Been thanked: 218 times

Re: Wiki page suggestion: Landmarks

Postby Riamus » Mon Oct 28, 2013 12:48 pm

Landmarks are fine when not overused. Too many are marking every single business, which isn't correct. That's why you see a mess. When only the items listed here are marked, it doesn't look bad at all.
ImageImage
Area Manager: Michigan - Northern LP.
Waze running on Samsung Galaxy S3.
Riamus
 
Posts: 1043
Joined: Sun May 05, 2013 7:34 pm
Location: Summerfield, NC
Has thanked: 66 times
Been thanked: 218 times

Re: Wiki page suggestion: Landmarks

Postby Riamus » Tue Oct 29, 2013 6:25 pm

Users are not required to use navigation. They are free to drive using just the map. At which point, yes, landmarks are useful.
ImageImage
Area Manager: Michigan - Northern LP.
Waze running on Samsung Galaxy S3.
Riamus
 
Posts: 1043
Joined: Sun May 05, 2013 7:34 pm
Location: Summerfield, NC
Has thanked: 66 times
Been thanked: 218 times

Re: Wiki page suggestion: Landmarks

Postby Riamus » Wed Oct 30, 2013 11:31 am

DG567 wrote:Yes, that's true, but at the moment Waze shows landmark labels in the distance in 3d view. "Such and such senior school" or "Whatever town country park" are long strings of text to have floating around the top of the map.
Perhaps the answer is to change the way Waze displays landmark labels, or to have them as an optional layer, then editors can add them at will without detracting from the basic function of providing clear navigation instructions.


I have no problem with landmarks being optional for display in the client. But as far as the labels go, if people aren't landmarking everything, those long labels really aren't a problem. They wrap and you're unlikely to see more than a few at any given time as long as the editors are not landmarking everything. The text tends to be clear enough from other text that it doesn't really affect the ability to see the map or road names or usability of the app. In any case, that's no reason not to map the landmarks.
ImageImage
Area Manager: Michigan - Northern LP.
Waze running on Samsung Galaxy S3.
Riamus
 
Posts: 1043
Joined: Sun May 05, 2013 7:34 pm
Location: Summerfield, NC
Has thanked: 66 times
Been thanked: 218 times

Re: Wiki page suggestion: Landmarks

Postby Riamus » Fri Nov 01, 2013 12:03 pm

Perhaps, but not in the US, which is the Wiki page we're discussing. :)

The unfortunate thing is that any national standards we adopt tend to be ignored in certain states, such as Florida saying they're going to landmark anything at least until there is a POI system in place regardless of any US standards. Because there isn't any actual enforcement of policies except by local editors, getting standards to work is difficult at best. My hope for landmarks is that once the POI system is in place, we'll see most of these editors drop the use of landmarks in the places that are technically not allowed in favor of using the POI system.
ImageImage
Area Manager: Michigan - Northern LP.
Waze running on Samsung Galaxy S3.
Riamus
 
Posts: 1043
Joined: Sun May 05, 2013 7:34 pm
Location: Summerfield, NC
Has thanked: 66 times
Been thanked: 218 times

Re: Wiki page suggestion: Landmarks

Postby sbelekevich » Fri Dec 07, 2012 7:41 pm

Den_in_USA wrote:
BlazeTool wrote:
jasonh300 wrote:I've been asking the developers to make the parking lot roads much less visible in the client, so that they won't clutter up the map as much. I've also asked them to make them gray in the editor so they'll be visibly different from streets and not clutter the editor screen.


Here's hoping they do it. Personally, I'd like to see PL roads not display at all in the client and be their own layer in the editor that can be turned off. Visual clutter goes away, problem reports for parking lots can go away. Only drawbacks would be it's still data to be transferred to the client and the extra nodes could effect routing times. Not sure if there are ways to avoid that.


I agree with everything you say. Either display parking lot roads as a ligher color, narrower line or at least allow the driver to "hide" those roads if he wants to.
+1
NE Wisconsin Area Manager (Green Bay / Appleton / Sturgeon Bay)
Wisconsin mapping resources
sbelekevich
 
Posts: 160
Joined: Wed Jan 25, 2012 5:26 pm
Has thanked: 0 time
Been thanked: 5 times

Re: Wiki page suggestion: Landmarks

Postby sbelekevich » Fri Jan 11, 2013 9:25 pm

AndyPoms wrote:
daknife wrote:Similarly in this thread it was mentioned and not contested (and thus accepted in my understanding) that bodies of water that are common driver navigation landmarks and are NOT found in the water layer are allowed. The river running the length of the Salt Lake Valley, the Jordan River, is not in the water layer for most of it's length so I've just authorized the editor who has been begging to add it, to do so.
That is something we're still looking into - we're currently having issues figuring out what's in the water layer and what's not. We wanted to get the basics out first (so we had something to point users towards) and would continue working on these things later...

Out of curiosity, what's the major issue with mapping water bodies? Redundancy? Server load?
Also, there was an editor out by me who landmarked some water just so the name had the potential to show up on the client. (ex. Mansur Bay, Ricker Bay, Lake Winnebago) What are the thoughts on that?

Also for PLots, wouldn't you want to map parking garages with public access, whether paid or unpaid, as a parking lot?
NE Wisconsin Area Manager (Green Bay / Appleton / Sturgeon Bay)
Wisconsin mapping resources
sbelekevich
 
Posts: 160
Joined: Wed Jan 25, 2012 5:26 pm
Has thanked: 0 time
Been thanked: 5 times

Re: Wiki page suggestion: Landmarks

Postby scruffy151 » Fri Sep 07, 2012 8:01 pm

WeeeZer14 wrote:I just always found roads and landmarks snapped to each other to be annoying for some reason.


You are not the only one that finds that annoying. It makes it harder to edit the geometry of either one when they are on top of each other.
scruffy151
 
Posts: 241
Joined: Sun Nov 13, 2011 3:03 am
Location: Vicksburg, MS
Has thanked: 3 times
Been thanked: 19 times

Re: Wiki page suggestion: Landmarks

Postby scruffy151 » Sun Sep 23, 2012 9:57 am

CrackedLCD wrote:In that case, why should we even label malls and other big landmarks anything other than parking lot, if they all look the same?


Now that parking lot roads are fixed I don't use parking lot landmarks anymore. You can add in extra roads in cases where a landmark may have been needed before.
scruffy151
 
Posts: 241
Joined: Sun Nov 13, 2011 3:03 am
Location: Vicksburg, MS
Has thanked: 3 times
Been thanked: 19 times

Re: Re: Wiki page suggestion: Landmarks

Postby scruffy151 » Tue Dec 04, 2012 5:33 pm

DG567 wrote:
pitzikun wrote:I'm personally going to delete road'ed parking lots that fit the jumbled mess criteria and replace with landmarks. Then on the main roadway, put very short road segments to denote where a parking lots entrance and exit is located.

That's ok for wazers driving TO the parking lot, but Waze will place you on the nearest road which may be outside the lot, so when you are LEAVING, your route may start from the wrong place if you are parked near the edge. You need to map parking lot roads around or through it to prevent this happening.


I have played with full grided parking lots, landmark only lots and a couple of steps in between. I personally have found that landmarks are no help when driving. A full grid is the most helpful however some/many of the roads take forever to get data and stay in a pac-man state long enough to be irritating. So from my experience I have come to the conculsion that the minimalist guidelines in the wiki are slightly too bare and like to add about every 4th road or so to the lot.
scruffy151
 
Posts: 241
Joined: Sun Nov 13, 2011 3:03 am
Location: Vicksburg, MS
Has thanked: 3 times
Been thanked: 19 times

PreviousNext

Return to Wiki Updates and Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: MGODLEW