Test of Text-to-Speech (TTS) Abbreviations in Waze Clients

[qwaletee]

Would anybody want to ßeta test new voice for US?

There is a new voice called: "Jane"

My initial impressions so far positive. It seems a bit faster than the default voice and seem more clearer. Would be useful those long directions on Hwy's in rather short segments.

Still there are issues with it. She read "Redman Ter" as Redmander. Also, few times it drag the word and read a little longer.

Sure, how do I activate it? For English, I only have Samantha and Tom... 4 Spanish, but only 2 English.

[qwaletee]

Android. Very old version if that matters (time for an upgrade!)

[qwaletee]

I'll try it too, if you need me. I have an iPhone.

Is there a thread for this somewhere I missed?

I guess you did

I'll ask that you are added as well. With you we should have a balance 3 iphone and 3 Android.

Here is the link:

https://www.waze.com/forum/viewforum.php?f=1029

Not authorized.

[qwaletee]

In reviewing this page on Abbreviations and acronyms the first section seems out of place in the flow. I propose that we move it after the standard abbreviations section. However since the standard section is so long, I will include a note in that section pointing people to the "non-standard" section if they don't see what they are looking for.

That page needs serious copyediting. Language is very sloppy and unclear. As an example, look at the info on abbreviating "tunnel," which doesn't make any sense. One refers to a tunnel, but the other refers to a roadway that is a tunnel?! Perhaps if you are familiar with the roads in question (which aren't linked), you might know that one isn't actually a tunnel, but is an access roadway. But that's just a guess, and even if correct, still raises serious questions about the policy espoused there.

It would be really nice if policy-setting text, anywhere in the wiki, linked to the discussion that finalized said policy. That would allow us to determine if it is truly a global standard, country-specific, or other region-specific, and whether it is good as-is or might need re-examination in light of new developments or occasional sanity.

[qwaletee]

I'd like to add another item to the spreadsheet, if it make sense. I've had two ongoing projects, one to work Indian Reservations and the other to work Forest Service Roads. I've interacted quite a bit with GIS people at Bureau of Indian Affairs and the US Forest Service and am continuing to do so.

Indian Service Road/Route (ISR-xxx) seems to be in the TTS spreadsheet already from a prior effort, without the xxx part at least. I am working on other abbreviations that would be more universal or as well.

I would now like to add FS-xxxxx to the TTS now as it is something that has cross-country applicability. The base map and subsequent edits have a variety of standards such as "Forest Service Road xxx," "Forest Rd xxx," "F S xxx," and others that include Route. We could standardize on this FS-xxxx as a way to simplify and make more sound the travel of Wazers on these roads.

I have quite a bit of information from the US Forest Service, particularly functional classifications, name standards and conventions for forest service roads, access to actual GIS data for anywhere in the nation, and a policy of where USFS wants people to use their roads and where not. I will start simplifying and posting this information elsewhere soon, but it would be good to get FS-xxx into the TTS list now.

I would suggest not using FSR-xxx for Forest Service Road/Route because it is longer and somewhat redundant. Just "Forest Service XXXX" would suffice as is done for "State Route xxxx," etc.

Vector, to the uninitiated, a state route is still an obvious road designation. But to the uninitiated ear, being asked to turn onto "Forest Service 123" sounds strange and a little confusing . It may be a bit longer, but I would prefer Forest Service Road.

[qwaletee]

Let's just suppose that someone is uninitiated, lost, and confused. What's the difference between "Turn right onto [unintelligible] road 123" and "Turn right onto [unintelligible] 123"?

For lack of a better expression, "This."

We've had a lot of discussion here on state route naming and abbreviation standards, and while a lot of it is good, some of the arguments (especially SR-/"state route" vs. State Hwy) aren't very convincing, I think. So everyone says "highway" instead of "route" in whatever state, I really don't think anyone's going to be very confused when Waze tells them to turn on "State Route 526" when they think of it as "Highway 526". There's a sign with some shape and the number "526" on it. Unless that state's DOT is particularly sadistic, there aren't going to be three roads with the same number at that intersection.

To me, there is. When you hear the word road, you have better mental context. When you hear "Forest Service 123," you think "what the heck is that/" And when you're already nervous because you aren't sure where you're going, that can be the difference between being able to talk to your navigator later tonight, or having to wait until the morning, if you know what I mean.

[qwaletee]

To me, there is. When you hear the word road, you have better mental context.

Is this in contrast to the mental context you have when Waze tells you to turn onto a river, railroad, boardwalk, or runway?

When Waze says, "Turn left on Broadway", I don't wonder whether that means to enter stage left or stage right. I know that it means a street not a theater.

Lots of roads don't have "road" in the name. The point is that regardless of whether Waze says, "State route 99", "C A 99", "California 99", "Highway 99", "State Highway 99", "The 99", or plain "99", the driver should understand it in context.

"Forest Service" is going to be a trail in that context. There are a finite number of turn instructions that Waze gives. I dare say that all are in the context of being on a road.

And when you're already nervous because you aren't sure where you're going, ...

I admit to not knowing what you mean by this. But that is the wrong mental state for operating a motor vehicle at all. Such a person needs to pull over safely somewhere and park. Review the route. Be familiar with the names ahead and the turns to be made. Do whatever it takes to remove the uncertainty. It is so easy with Waze to drag the map to see what is ahead. The turn instruction text is prominently displayed on the screen.

And above all, if Waze tries to route you across a FS-nnxnn road and you don't know what it is, select fastest route or drive somewhere else first. You probably shouldn't be on such a road if it wasn't your intended destination.

That's a little preachy. Some people have enormous aplomb, and don't really worry about anything. Some people are nervous wrecks, and probably should never step behind the wheel. Most of us lie somewhere in between. I'm not talking about complete freak-out in unfamiliar territory, just that say, mildly sinking feeling when you aren't sure whether you're lost. The more alien-sounding the directons at that point, the less reassuring they are.

"Forest Service 123" is alien-sounding. That's it. You think it isn't? We have no common ground to discuss then.

"Forest Service Road 123" is a little more friendly sounding. That's all I'm pointing out, and that's helpful for many.

On top of that, what's the great loss in adding "Road?"

[R4CLucky14]

After reading this thread for the first time, I really like the notion of a separate TTS field. Would solve alot of the issues with overlapping abbreviations.

[R4CLucky14]

I saw a street sign today for a "Terrace" which used "TR" as the abbreviation. This would conflict with "TR" for "Trail."

I am uncertain if spelling or standard abbreviations is taught at Street Sign School.

Normally, Trail would be Trl, Terrace would be Ter

https://www.usps.com/send/official-abbreviations.htm (click on the Street Suffixes tab).

With all this conflicts, why are we doing this? Wouldn't it be better to simply ask Waze to
implement a TTS field, so we can actually follow the goal of making it simple to the user: matching the BGS?

[rcenteno_davis]

I have confirmed (as others) that Intl is pronounced as "Intel". So, despite what the road signs say, should we expand Intl as International (for airports)?