[Script] WME Validator 1.1.20 / 03.11.2016

[paulkok_my]

Any way to enforce ramps according to guidelines?

Sure, but different countries have different guidelines. Sorry, I have no clue where you are from

At the moment I'd like to see bug reports more than ever

He is from Malaysia

Sent from my GT-I9300 using Tapatalk

[davidg666]

I've found what I consider to a bug: unneeded node reported between two segments where one of the segments has time-based restrictions and the other doesn't.

If you look here, there's a pair of segments, and Validator considers the node between them to be unneeded, however the top segment has time-based restrictions (there's a gate there that's closed at night) but the lower segment has no such restriction.

If you think this is a real bug, can you disable reporting of unneeded nodes in cases where one segment has time-based restrictions and the other doesn't? I expect this is a change that should be common to all countries, not just Ireland.

thanks!

++David \ davidg666

[dbraughlr]

Previously, unneeded nodes were reported for those used for change of elevation and road type also. I haven't re-tested.

[AlanOfTheBerg]

If you look here, there's a pair of segments, and Validator considers the node between them to be unneeded, however the top segment has time-based restrictions (there's a gate there that's closed at night) but the lower segment has no such restriction.

I don't get this. Why would you ever traverse the lower segment just to turn around? Why not have a single segment with the restriction? It doesn't go anywhere else, so regardless of whether it is one or two segments, the routing effect is identical. Or else I'm not getting it...

If Waze thinks the destination is closer to the segment with restrictions than any other segment, it will override the segment restrictions. This is just like any turn restriction.

The only thing this segment restriction does is affect travel along the whole segment, so having two parts is unnecessary.

[dbraughlr]

As for me, I like having a node at the gate. It makes it easier to find the point of access control between the public side and the private side even though there might be no reason to drive up to the gate when it is closed and it makes an "unneeded" node.

[davidg666]

If you look here, there's a pair of segments, and Validator considers the node between them to be unneeded, however the top segment has time-based restrictions (there's a gate there that's closed at night) but the lower segment has no such restriction.

I don't get this. Why would you ever traverse the lower segment just to turn around? Why not have a single segment with the restriction? It doesn't go anywhere else, so regardless of whether it is one or two segments, the routing effect is identical. Or else I'm not getting it...

If Waze thinks the destination is closer to the segment with restrictions than any other segment, it will override the segment restrictions. This is just like any turn restriction.

The only thing this segment restriction does is affect travel along the whole segment, so having two parts is unnecessary.

There are two buildings on the inside of the gate that are accessible at all times from inside the park (it's a very large park with roads throughout that doesn't close completely at night - just the smaller gates close at night). Access to these buildings shouldn't be restricted, only passage *through* the gate should be restricted.

I agree that restricting one single segment would have the same effect on routing because the restriction just imposes a routing penalty and there's no other way to the part of this road that remains accessible, however it feels wrong to mark a bit of road as time-restricted when it isn't.

++David \ davidg666

[Timbones]

If Waze thinks the destination is closer to the segment with restrictions than any other segment, it will override the segment restrictions. This is just like any turn restriction.

Are you sure? In tests I did a little while ago, Waze acted as if the restricted roads didn't exist at all...
(behaviour may have changed since, without warning, as it often does)

[AlanOfTheBerg]

If Waze thinks the destination is closer to the segment with restrictions than any other segment, it will override the segment restrictions. This is just like any turn restriction.

Are you sure? In tests I did a little while ago, Waze acted as if the restricted roads didn't exist at all...
(behaviour may have changed since, without warning, as it often does)

Things change all the time, so I very well could be wrong. In fact, that'd be great in this case!

[sketch]

^ (here, in response to Alan/Timbones)

Consider someone going to one of the buildings near the gate, after the gate is closed. If Waze doesn't ignore restricted roads entirely, having the restriction on the whole segment would make Waze indifferent to which direction it came into the segment, and would be just as likely to send you through the closed gate as it would be to send you through the complex (the "possible" way). If Waze does ignore restricted roads entirely, it'll send you to R806 instead of North Rd (inside the complex), which is unhelpful because those buildings are inside the fence.

[ditchi56]

Here's another example. What we have here is a road with a locked gate in the middle, to which only the residents have a key. Each end of the road is accessible to everybody, but only key holders can pass through.

If the central section isn't on the map, and any of the residents start driving through the gate with Waze running, Map Problems will result. OK, they can be deleted, but better to avoid them in the first place - besides an editor not knowing the situation might react to the Map Problem by creating an unrestricted link.

With the central section in but restricted, non-residents never get routed along the road past the gate. Neither do residents, which isn't ideal, but at least they know the area and can make their own decision to ignore the Waze route when they want.

So in my view, Validator should be detecting that the restrictions are different each side of the node, and not flagging it for removal.