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

[ 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: Test of Text-to-Speech (TTS) Abbreviations in Waze Clien

Postby Thortok2000 » Wed Feb 12, 2014 3:04 am

I was talking with txemt about this issue in another thread. Personally I would want to label where ramps split even if it's only 100 feet or so to the next turn and the label would be rather long.

Because I feel like the key portion of the instruction "keep right" is the very first thing said, and the rest is just gravy. Therefore the TTS is relatively unimportant semi-beneficial information but if it cuts itself off to give the next instruction, that's okay with me. In the meantime, the on-screen information is accurate and matches the sign at the split exactly.

If it doesn't cut itself off and fails to give the next instruction because the previous one is still going, that's a problem, and potentially worth shortening or removing the names of short-length ramps. Txemt was saying that's what happens and that's what I was trying to test. But I couldn't find an instruction long enough that it needed to be interrupted, even when I was trying to manufacture one. =(
Thortok2000
Area Manager
Area Manager
 
Posts: 722
Joined: Tue Oct 15, 2013 1:01 am
Location: Greenville, SC
Has thanked: 190 times
Been thanked: 141 times

Re: Test of Text-to-Speech (TTS) Abbreviations in Waze Clien

Postby vectorspace » Wed Feb 12, 2014 1:57 am

Thortok2000 wrote:...If the forest service roads are as bad as you say and shouldn't be used for through-driving, perhaps marking them 'private road' could be considered. This would prevent routing through them unless the destination requires it. And definitely 'dirt road' for the ones that aren't paved. ...


It's good you brought up this topic, which is somewhat covered on the Forest Service Road topic here in the forum and on the new (draft) Wiki page I am starting to edit.

I want to point out that these roads should be marked as highways, primary streets, and streets where appropriate because three out of the five classification levels of the roads (maintenance levels) are completely passable. We don't want to mark too many as dirt roads or 4x4 roads because they will become unavailable to routing that may be critical especially in western states or rural areas. The whole point of the Wiki, discussion, and debate with other editors, and champs is so we make a good group decision on how to suggest best practices for editing these roads. I don't want to presuppose the final answer as my initial thoughts may be bettered by other ideas.

I suggest that other than TTS comments on Forest Service Roads, we stop discussion on this thread and move it to: https://www.waze.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=129&t=47655. The only discussion here should be about TTS.

I am in favor of keeping it simple and using FS-XXX from my background on this topic and the great discussion here too. Abbreviations are just that. We don't need formal English in all locations, although I have some appeal for the contrary arguments stated here.
vectorspace
 
Posts: 1183
Joined: Sat Dec 17, 2011 7:05 pm
Location: Albuquerque, NM, USA
Has thanked: 173 times
Been thanked: 420 times

Re: Test of Text-to-Speech (TTS) Abbreviations in Waze Clien

Postby Thortok2000 » Wed Feb 12, 2014 12:45 am

I-80-whatever is 'an interstate' and so it includes interstate in the name (abbreviation I).

I don't know what broadway is. It could very well be 'a broadway' and therefore broadway's in the name.

If the forest service roads are as bad as you say and shouldn't be used for through-driving, perhaps marking them 'private road' could be considered. This would prevent routing through them unless the destination requires it. And definitely 'dirt road' for the ones that aren't paved.

And to me, the key part of the instruction is not the number, it's the 'turn right' part. If I know I need to turn right, the name of the road I'm turning onto almost isn't even important at all, unless it's an intersection with unusual geometry, at which point I typically just look at my phone to see where it wants me to go.

I named the road into the parking lot where I live 'Really long name of absolutely no significance except for testing.' I then named another road in the parking lot 'another name of absolutely no significance but is still of use for testing.' It didn't have any pauses or abbreviations in there so they didn't take as long to say as I had originally expected (about 2 seconds each) but it had no problem announcing them in time. Particularly the 'turn right' instruction.

So again, I personally don't really care either way. I think 'forest service' is just fine. But as far as matching the standard, I think 'forest service road' is more consistent with other abbreviations.
Thortok2000
Area Manager
Area Manager
 
Posts: 722
Joined: Tue Oct 15, 2013 1:01 am
Location: Greenville, SC
Has thanked: 190 times
Been thanked: 141 times

Re: Test of Text-to-Speech (TTS) Abbreviations in Waze Clien

Postby sketch » Tue Feb 11, 2014 4:06 pm

Thortok2000 wrote:Essentially, the standard is for the type of road to be fully given, and THEN the number. Is it a 'forest service' or is it a 'forest service road'?

It's like the difference between saying 'state highway 291' and 'state 291'.

Well, maybe so, but down here and up where I visit we call them "L A One" and "Emm Twenty-Five", respectively ;)
sketch
Waze Global Champs
Waze Global Champs
 
Posts: 5846
Joined: Sat Aug 08, 2009 6:13 pm
Location: New Orleans, LA
Has thanked: 1385 times
Been thanked: 1881 times

Re: Test of Text-to-Speech (TTS) Abbreviations in Waze Clien

Postby Thortok2000 » Tue Feb 11, 2014 12:31 pm

Look at the road.

Point at it.

Begin the sentence: "That is a..."

If your sentence ends with 'interstate' make sure that's in the name. If your sentence ends with 'state highway' or 'state route' make sure that's in the name. Etc.

Would you really say "that is a forest service"? I would think the sentence would make more sense by saying "That is a forest service road."

Essentially, the standard is for the type of road to be fully given, and THEN the number. Is it a 'forest service' or is it a 'forest service road'?

It's like the difference between saying 'state highway 291' and 'state 291'.

I personally vote the 'road' as being necessary for standardization purposes. Do I think it'd work fine without it? Yup. I think '291' is all that's needed and we could drop the 'state hwy' part. But for standardization purposes, I don't think it harms anything to have the couple extra words.
Thortok2000
Area Manager
Area Manager
 
Posts: 722
Joined: Tue Oct 15, 2013 1:01 am
Location: Greenville, SC
Has thanked: 190 times
Been thanked: 141 times

Re: Test of Text-to-Speech (TTS) Abbreviations in Waze Clien

Postby Thortok2000 » Tue Feb 11, 2014 12:52 am

What's ironic, sketch, is around here we don't call them state route or state hwy. We just call it '291.' MAYBE 'highway 291' and very, very rarely 'route 291.' But it's usually just '291.'

I've even caught newbie editors around here changing it to say that as well. =/
Thortok2000
Area Manager
Area Manager
 
Posts: 722
Joined: Tue Oct 15, 2013 1:01 am
Location: Greenville, SC
Has thanked: 190 times
Been thanked: 141 times

Re: Test of Text-to-Speech (TTS) Abbreviations in Waze Clien

Postby qwaletee » Mon Feb 10, 2014 8:26 pm

vectorspace wrote: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
US Waze Champs
US Waze Champs
 
Posts: 2866
Joined: Wed Feb 13, 2013 1:42 am
Location: NYC Metro - Active throughout NE^2 (Northeast & New England)
Has thanked: 227 times
Been thanked: 1109 times

Re: Test of Text-to-Speech (TTS) Abbreviations in Waze Clien

Postby vectorspace » Sun Feb 09, 2014 10:56 pm

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.
vectorspace
 
Posts: 1183
Joined: Sat Dec 17, 2011 7:05 pm
Location: Albuquerque, NM, USA
Has thanked: 173 times
Been thanked: 420 times

Re: Test of Text-to-Speech (TTS) Abbreviations in Waze Clien

Postby GizmoGuy411 » Sun Feb 09, 2014 11:14 am

4. The exception to the above is abbreviations for states and or territories; and countries with their three character abbreviation. These contain correct punctuation. Other regions do not fall under this category.
For example: California would be abbreviated to C.A. not CA and Victoria to VIC.


If I am reading this correct, I have an exception to this.

We have been pushing for 2 years now for Waze to adopt the USPS (and others) two letter (without punctuation) for the US States, and Canadian Provinces.
GizmoGuy411
Global Champ Mentor
Global Champ Mentor
 
Posts: 1402
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2010 3:14 am
Location: NW Ohio, SE Michigan, NW Indiana tri-state area
Has thanked: 647 times
Been thanked: 426 times

Re: Test of Text-to-Speech (TTS) Abbreviations in Waze Clien

Postby kentsmith9 » Wed Feb 05, 2014 1:01 am

It looks like one of our Australian editors was making some changes for the Australian pages and then came in making changes here as well.

sketch wrote:
bgodette wrote:
qwaletee wrote:That page needs serious copyediting.
Go right ahead, and be sure to submit it to a new page or sandbox so others can review your work.

It's not copyediting that page needs, it's a full rewrite, and maybe just a removal of that first section. Those are not the rules, at least in the US, and they don't belong on a country-nonspecific page. (They are, indeed, also pretty difficult to understand.)

I would agree and I am fine if qwaletee wants to take a first crack at it.

I created a separate page linked to the original just for easy locating if we all forget about it. Whoever holds up their hand first should be given initial control over the page and then ask for input from this forum. I have temporarily assigned it to qwaletee, but if someone else steps up or wants it just change the name at the top of the page linked above.

Once we all agree or get enough consensus we can just cut and paste the new content over the old. No need to track our session edits before the final. The history will hold the original page changes for reference.
kentsmith9
Waze Global Champs
Waze Global Champs
 
Posts: 5192
Joined: Mon Apr 23, 2012 3:33 pm
Location: SF/SJ Bay Area of Northern California
Has thanked: 1328 times
Been thanked: 1568 times

PreviousNext

Return to United States

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users