Landmark - Best Practices US

[ img ] This is the place to discuss issues that are relevant for locations in the US. For any other discussions, please use the main forums.

Moderator: MapSir

Re: Landmark - Best Practices US

Postby jasonh300 » Thu May 30, 2013 9:07 pm

PhantomSoul wrote:Follow up question: should the anchor point serve this purpose?


YES!!!

Unfortunately, it isn't repositionable, and it seems to try to computer the geometric center of the landmark, but how it arrives at that is often a mystery.
jasonh300
 
Posts: 7568
Joined: Fri Oct 28, 2011 4:26 pm
Location: New Orleans, LA, USA
Has thanked: 408 times
Been thanked: 985 times

Re: Landmark - Best Practices US

Postby PhantomSoul » Thu May 30, 2013 8:57 pm

The lack of being able to define a single point for a POI (POINT of interest - who knew?) to navigate to strikes again. Just sayin' (Is anyone keeping count?)

That being said, don't the landmark polygons have an anchor point that serves as the spot Waze would navigate to if you put that landmark in as a destination - or is that just for like moving the whole landmark in WME? Follow up question: should the anchor point serve this purpose?
PhantomSoul
Local Champ Mentor
Local Champ Mentor
 
Posts: 1681
Joined: Wed Oct 10, 2012 4:00 am
Location: Union, NJ USA
Has thanked: 304 times
Been thanked: 501 times

Re: Landmark - Best Practices US

Postby Daknife » Thu May 30, 2013 8:49 pm

Wow, totally against the proposed National Standards, excessive and serves to inspire other editors to do the same to every other building they think of landmarking. I would rather suggest keep the large landmark for the entire airfield and putting a small inner landmark (that will never show on the client) for the terminals to aid in navigation to said terminals and maybe another for a General Aviation entry and one for a Cargo entry point but beyond that way too much work, way too many separate landmarks and too much data to be sent to the client (remember some people are limited in how much data they can use each month).

What purpose does it serve to map out the outline of every terminal taxi-way and runway? No waze should ever be trying to drive to those landmarks. A single large landmark for the entire airport with a couple inner guide marks to lead navigation to the passenger drop-offs, Long and short term parking and cargo/delivery points is all that is needed.
Daknife
Waze Mentor
Waze Mentor
 
Posts: 1683
Joined: Sat Dec 24, 2011 11:03 pm
Location: Riverdale, Utah
Has thanked: 456 times
Been thanked: 229 times

Re: Landmark - Best Practices US

Postby razor2k » Thu May 30, 2013 1:14 am

jemay wrote:If you only searched for LAX, you would have been routed to the wrong entrance to LAX (closer to the coast), so I have created a small landmark https://www.waze.com/editor/#?%23%3F=&z ... rks=797743 and now when you search you get LAX, Los Angeles, CA in the top two items of the search. So I know the search is using landmark information in the client and map editor... Creating the landmark may have not been in the best practices but I was able to get the search to work and it returns the correct location.


Great way to simplify :) However, all the terminals, taxi-ways, runways etc,,seem way too detailed. Is that really necessary? I know you didn't create them.....I just think all those extra nodes just take up unnecessary storage. Should all that be whittled down also?

Just thinking out loud :)
razor2k
 
Posts: 696
Joined: Thu May 10, 2012 8:40 pm
Location: Saint Petersburg, FL
Has thanked: 62 times
Been thanked: 54 times

Re: Landmark - Best Practices US

Postby vectorspace » Wed May 29, 2013 5:29 am

PhantomSoul wrote:Shouldn't POI's be points instead of complex polygons, just from a database perspective? ... A landmark is, by definition, prominent. I think one of the things that has to be decided is whether we want to limit landmarks to physical prominence - in other words, does the thing, say, visually stand out from the vast majority of things around it, perhaps for at least a few miles? ...


Thanks PhanomSoul for starting a great discussion and everyone for their response. This seems rather critical to editing, yet I would rather now wait for an answer from Waze to edit anything in this category if we know of certain solutions like the ones earlier in this post about small landmarks as having POI value at airports. I deleted the Albuquerque Sunport because of this reason and put it over the terminal building.

I like the distinction between visual and social prominence... where social might have to do with tourist attractions, churches, etc. There's also the difference between actual land-area of an item and the key entrance point. For instance, one may map a golf course as a means to show spatial reference in the map, obstacles, etc., but that doesn't lead you to the club house. So, if this large golf course object or objects is named the course name, will POI search bring you to the wrong place? Sure could, it seems from this discussion.

If landmarks are small enough, they don't show on the client and can be POI's right? There are now a bunch of these as new gas stations all over the map from the recent automated process.

This is a community based crowd-sourced application right? So why wait for a response from Waze if none comes. If you choose a standard and the map is edited with more data, won't the app follow? Just curious I guess. If we all used a certain sized small landmark as a POI and the right types or agree upon use of something like "other," wouldn't that suffice?
vectorspace
 
Posts: 1183
Joined: Sat Dec 17, 2011 7:05 pm
Location: Albuquerque, NM, USA
Has thanked: 173 times
Been thanked: 420 times

Re: Landmark - Best Practices US

Postby jasonh300 » Wed May 29, 2013 12:10 am

jemay wrote:If you only searched for LAX, you would have been routed to the wrong entrance to LAX (closer to the coast), so I have created a small landmark https://www.waze.com/editor/#?%23%3F=&z ... rks=797743 and now when you search you get LAX, Los Angeles, CA in the top two items of the search. So I know the search is using landmark information in the client and map editor... Creating the landmark may have not been in the best practices but I was able to get the search to work and it returns the correct location.


That's what I had to do for MSY. The landmark originally covered the entire property of the airport and as a result, was leading people coming from I-10 into a commercial/industrial area on the north side of the airport, where the streets dead-end at the edge of the airport property. The actual entrance to the airport is on the south side, a couple of miles away. I removed the name of the large landmark, drew a new one over the terminal building, and named that one.

Additionally, I drew some tiny landmarks for long term and short term parking and arrivals and departures, and now they lead you to the exact spots that take you to those places, and they show up at the top of the list.

These tiny landmarks would be better served by a POI point (which we don't have).

However, at this point, the only landmarks I've gotten to work in the search are the ones that have been set as Airport, hence the need for a test of all landmark types. I suspect that some are set to work with the search and some are not.
jasonh300
 
Posts: 7568
Joined: Fri Oct 28, 2011 4:26 pm
Location: New Orleans, LA, USA
Has thanked: 408 times
Been thanked: 985 times

Re: Landmark - Best Practices US

Postby jemay » Wed May 29, 2013 12:04 am

If you only searched for LAX, you would have been routed to the wrong entrance to LAX (closer to the coast), so I have created a small landmark https://www.waze.com/editor/#?%23%3F=&z ... rks=797743 and now when you search you get LAX, Los Angeles, CA in the top two items of the search. So I know the search is using landmark information in the client and map editor... Creating the landmark may have not been in the best practices but I was able to get the search to work and it returns the correct location.
jemay
Waze Global Champs
Waze Global Champs
 
Posts: 1975
Joined: Tue Nov 09, 2010 1:26 am
Location: US South West - Lakewood, CA
Has thanked: 618 times
Been thanked: 898 times

Re: Landmark - Best Practices US

Postby jasonh300 » Tue May 28, 2013 9:51 pm

bgodette wrote:Landmarks in search results worked for a long time (back when we were using 2.4 and well into 3.x), but then broke sometime around gas prices, and has recently returned to working again.


Not entirely. There are landmarks I've placed specifically for the purpose of them coming up first in the search results (above the incorrect results from Bing). Some work, and some do not. I'm trying to work out which ones work and which do not and the reason why.
jasonh300
 
Posts: 7568
Joined: Fri Oct 28, 2011 4:26 pm
Location: New Orleans, LA, USA
Has thanked: 408 times
Been thanked: 985 times

Re: Landmark - Best Practices US

Postby bgodette » Tue May 28, 2013 9:24 pm

vectorspace wrote:
AlanOfTheBerg wrote:
PhantomSoul wrote:What's the relationship between landmarks and POI's?

In Waze? There is no relationship because there is no POI database. It's only landmarks, which are, often, being "abused" to input POIs. And "abused" only in the sense that we simply do not have another option.


That's interesting. I thought landmarks would be accessible in a POI search. I read or heard somewhere from Waze that they would like to expand their internal database of search information too. Jason's comment a few posts back in this topic seemed to indicate that landmark access in POI search started occurring about three weeks ago (unless I misunderstood). I thought I verified it worked by searching for some of my landmarks (BIA was one when I went there for a meeting).

mike
Landmarks in search results worked for a long time (back when we were using 2.4 and well into 3.x), but then broke sometime around gas prices, and has recently returned to working again.
bgodette
Waze Global Champs
Waze Global Champs
 
Posts: 3434
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2011 8:19 pm
Location: Denver, CO
Has thanked: 114 times
Been thanked: 537 times

Re: Landmark - Best Practices US

Postby mapcat » Tue May 28, 2013 8:43 pm

PhantomSoul wrote:Shouldn't POI's be points instead of complex polygons, just from a database perspective?

Absolutely. But the devs haven't provided a way to create anything like this yet. I've asked; no response.

Complex polygons are OK for true landmarks, which, by definition, are supposed to be few and far between (i.e., you really should not see 6 different landmarks on a single block of road; most of those things would probably not be actual landmarks then). There's no limit, however, to how many POI's you could have in any given area though.

Very good point, and a good argument for not establishing any sort of "best practices" until it's been decided whether or not point symbols for POIs are forthcoming.
mapcat
 
Posts: 2444
Joined: Mon Dec 20, 2010 5:29 am
Has thanked: 95 times
Been thanked: 196 times

PreviousNext

Return to United States

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users