Road Types (USA) – comprehensive overhaul of drivable roads

Moderators: MapSir, USA Champs

Re: Road Types (USA) – comprehensive overhaul of drivable ro

Postby bart99gt » Sun Mar 30, 2014 3:10 am

sketch wrote:What you're saying is that Waze prefers Major Highways inordinately above other roads for shorter-distance routing. I have not found this to be the case, and it seems others haven't either, but even if it were true it would be representative of a different issue.


I actually fixed a UR a couple of weeks ago where Waze was doing exactly that, preferring a MH where other route choices exist. User complained Waze kept trying to send them to a MH that was another 5-6 miles up the road when there were some mH and primary street alternatives that were a shorter, and depending on traffic, often faster. That was one of the instances I had mind when I said that the urban classification maps often over-classify a road segment when taking into consideration Waze's routing temperament.

I also saw this, and corrected it, last year when making a trip from Memphis, TN to Gulf Shores, AL. Even when I got closer to the mH segment(US-45 Alt, which I upgraded to MH, as it should have been all along) it STILL wanted to force me over to the MHs which were a longer, and slower route to take. It looks like it took banished upgrading the last stretch of 2 lane US-45 between State Line and Mobile to MH to finally get Waze to route that way instead of trying to put you on a MH that was 15-20 miles further and a few minutes slower, just because it was a MH over a mH.

Waze's over-preference towards highways of any type vs. roads that may make more practical sense is the only issue I really have with its routing style. I can understand why it can't consider every possible route over a long distance, but perhaps it needs to be retrained to start considering lesser road types a little more either on short trips (less than 20 miles) or say within 20 miles of the destination.
ImageImage
Image
US Country Manager
Mississippi State Manager
Memphis, TN Area Manager
Cobb/Douglas County, GA Area Manager

Mississippi Wiki Page https://wiki.waze.com/wiki/Mississippi
bart99gt
Country Manager
Country Manager
 
Posts: 1006
Joined: Mon Apr 15, 2013 9:53 pm
Location: Olive Branch, MS
Has thanked: 95 times
Been thanked: 232 times

Re: dirt roads

Postby bart99gt » Sun Mar 23, 2014 8:51 pm

dbraughlr wrote:
miked_64 wrote:I routinely downgrade Minor Collector from Primary to 4x4 / Dirt Roads if they are not paved. This is the only way for the Avoid Dirt Roads option to work.


I am on the side that believes where our streets and minor highways are dirt, they can't be avoided anyway and should be set according to function so that they work correctly for the people who haven't set "Avoid dirt roads" (whatever that is really supposed to mean). The function of a road and its surface material are independent characteristics. Not all 4x4 trails are dirt. Abandoned paved highways can be 4x4 trails.


You have to think beyond the functional class in this instance and take into consideration the physical characteristic of the road. There is no point in having an avoid dirt road feature if we go about calling them primary streets or highways because that is how the local transportation department classified them. It is an invitation to URs because someone got routed down a gravel road that was classified as a primary street or highway, and wanted to avoid even a well graded gravel road because they don't want to chip the paint on their brand new $40,000 car. I live and edit in an area where there are quite a few dirt/gravel roads that are non-state maintained signed highways and collector routes.

What really needs to be done is Waze needs to provide a separate "unpaved" checkbox, similar to that of toll roads. It would be the simplest solution to the problem. Users that have no preference as to the type of road they drive on will get better routes because the road can be functionally classified properly, and users that wish to avoid such roads won't be routed down them. Win-win.
ImageImage
Image
US Country Manager
Mississippi State Manager
Memphis, TN Area Manager
Cobb/Douglas County, GA Area Manager

Mississippi Wiki Page https://wiki.waze.com/wiki/Mississippi
bart99gt
Country Manager
Country Manager
 
Posts: 1006
Joined: Mon Apr 15, 2013 9:53 pm
Location: Olive Branch, MS
Has thanked: 95 times
Been thanked: 232 times

Re: Road Types (USA) – comprehensive overhaul of drivable ro

Postby banished » Fri Aug 05, 2016 1:21 am

So long as we are not binding the Waze wiki" to Wikipedia and not changing the present hybrid FC system (but use "favored" and "unfavored" to fine-tune hybrid FC for routing purposes where appropriate), I'm OK with it.

A general observation -- maybe more a perception -- it seems the Waze wiki has become as much about why decisions were made as about conveying the how-to instructions, themselves. I'd call this "wiki bloat," but one man's bloat may be another man's treasure.
GC, New England ARC, Veteran, CISSP, MCP
banished
Waze Global Champs
Waze Global Champs
 
Posts: 1226
Joined: Mon Sep 28, 2009 11:03 am
Has thanked: 245 times
Been thanked: 208 times

Re: Road Types (USA) – comprehensive overhaul of drivable ro

Postby banished » Sun May 04, 2014 5:02 pm

In the Southeast, we're handling it at a regional level instead of each state going rogue. It works because all 3 states are so similar in their road systems.
GC, New England ARC, Veteran, CISSP, MCP
banished
Waze Global Champs
Waze Global Champs
 
Posts: 1226
Joined: Mon Sep 28, 2009 11:03 am
Has thanked: 245 times
Been thanked: 208 times

Re: Road Types (USA) – comprehensive overhaul of drivable ro

Postby banished » Sat Apr 19, 2014 1:34 am

I received a return email from the GA DOT on my query about the broken links to their FC maps.

In response to your inquiry IMS000000065643 submitted on 4/16/2014 1:04:26 PM to Georgia Department of Transportation:

Thank you for contacting YOUR Georgia Department of Transportation. The Office of Transportation Data has retired the Functional Classification Maps. We're in the process of removing this information from the external website. People interested in this information should contact Transportation Data directly at (770) 986-1360.

We do appreciate you contacting our agency and please feel free to contact us again.

Respectfully,
Customer Service Unit
Georgia DOT


That is interesting given https://www.waze.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=214&t=89310. Maybe I'll call the number next week to see if they really mean the FC information will no longer be publicly available.
GC, New England ARC, Veteran, CISSP, MCP
banished
Waze Global Champs
Waze Global Champs
 
Posts: 1226
Joined: Mon Sep 28, 2009 11:03 am
Has thanked: 245 times
Been thanked: 208 times

Re: Road Types (USA) – comprehensive overhaul of drivable ro

Postby banished » Thu Apr 17, 2014 7:13 pm

sketch wrote:Okay. Here is the final version of the revision.

https://wiki.waze.com/wiki/Road_types/USA/Revision

After throwing in the other and non-drivable portions (which should be revised separately), I reorganized and changed some of the headings, revised some of the explanatory text, and added another example to the mbox.


Per Meetup discussion, will there be a vote or have you and Andy already resolved any differences?
GC, New England ARC, Veteran, CISSP, MCP
banished
Waze Global Champs
Waze Global Champs
 
Posts: 1226
Joined: Mon Sep 28, 2009 11:03 am
Has thanked: 245 times
Been thanked: 208 times

Re: Road Types (USA) – comprehensive overhaul of drivable ro

Postby banished » Thu Apr 17, 2014 6:23 pm

sketch wrote:On it.

edit: Done.


I just updated the spreadsheet (very easy) last night so now someone needs to transcribe the Georgia data I entered over to this web page. Relocating critical information, such as this, deserves a system-wide announcement. Did I miss that memo?

After the Georgia data is transcribed, someone needs to tell the spreadsheet owner to delete it so we don't have two competing, unsynchronized, data sources.
GC, New England ARC, Veteran, CISSP, MCP
banished
Waze Global Champs
Waze Global Champs
 
Posts: 1226
Joined: Mon Sep 28, 2009 11:03 am
Has thanked: 245 times
Been thanked: 208 times

Re: Road Types (USA) – comprehensive overhaul of drivable ro

Postby banished » Sun Apr 06, 2014 5:14 pm

It seems to eliminate the need for the discussion, at all, to the extent any if it was meant to inform/fix routing decisions.
GC, New England ARC, Veteran, CISSP, MCP
banished
Waze Global Champs
Waze Global Champs
 
Posts: 1226
Joined: Mon Sep 28, 2009 11:03 am
Has thanked: 245 times
Been thanked: 208 times

Re: Road Types (USA) – comprehensive overhaul of drivable ro

Postby banished » Sun Apr 06, 2014 4:06 pm

Implications for this discussion...?

https://www.waze.com/forum/viewtopic.ph ... 49#p746349
GC, New England ARC, Veteran, CISSP, MCP
banished
Waze Global Champs
Waze Global Champs
 
Posts: 1226
Joined: Mon Sep 28, 2009 11:03 am
Has thanked: 245 times
Been thanked: 208 times

Re: Road Types (USA) – comprehensive overhaul of drivable ro

Postby banished » Sun Mar 30, 2014 11:58 pm

After dropping out of this discussion several pages ago, I researched FC in Florida and Alabama, and modified one county to see what would happen to the existing routing aligned under KISS. To revisit KISS again:

US – major
state – minor
county (or equivalent) – primary

Aligning with FC broke the ideal routing from the Florida Gulf Coast to Montgomery, AL. By “ideal routing” I mean:

a. What I know to be true since this is where I live
b. What Google Maps says is the best routing – which happens to align exactly with a.

More about this in a minute.

KISS, though easier to understand and it brings consistency to editing, isn’t perfect, either. (Yes, I, a KISS supporter, said that.) The rural south has county roads that are dirt. Red clay, washboard, sticks to everything, dirt. Are they primary segments as aligned under KISS? (Don’t answer that!) An “unpaved” check-box might be helpful in these situations, but there’s little sense in talking about options we don’t have. Never-the-less, I have seen darn few long-distance routing error reports under the KISS methodology.

But wanting to be a team player, I continued with FC study since it seems the direction we are headed. I found places where roads should be upgraded from their FC classification – as described in sketch’s FC-hybrid proposal.

There are segments that should not be upgraded from pure FC. One such road in my region is US-90 across north Florida parallel to I-10. Florida rates it a minor arterial (mH)…and it really is given I-10’s close proximity.

====================================================

So, what I have gotten out of the discussion is this:

- No one outside of Waze knows enough to state confidently when Waze uses speed data (average & current) or segment type, or a hybrid. We don’t know the proprietary algorithms/data so struggle to inform our thought processes based on personal experience; experience which lacks consistency from one editor to the next seemingly based on their location. In short, we are trying to determine how to apply segment types around inconsistencies or expectations of Waze’s routing. We don't know what we don't know.

- We seem to have confidence in speed data informing Waze’s routing results in metro and on more heavily traveled routes

- We seem to have limited confidence in speed data – or even its availability – to inform Waze's routing results elsewhere (e.g., off-the-interstate rural routes). In those areas:

o Waze routing appears to favor segment classification that heavily weights Interstate & MH over mH
o The discussion about US-212 was informative; FYI, Google Maps chooses US-212 as the best route between Rapid City and Billings, and US-212 is indeed a principal arterial (MH) per http://mdt.mt.gov/travinfo/docs/funct-c ... cation.pdf and http://sddot.com/transportation/highway ... assMap.pdf. Sketch has completed changing US-212 from mH to MH and the belief is after the next tile update (http://status.waze.com) we'll know if that had the desired impact.


- The effects of FC-hybrid on routing in metro and rural areas are not reliably comparable and should not influence any decision on what methodology to use

- Under FC-hybrid, road segments can be upgraded from pure FC, but not downgraded

- Under FC-pure, a lot of current road segments would be downgraded

========================================

What I think to be true:

- What to with dirt roads, even if they are county roads, is clearer in FC-hybrid than KISS

- Both KISS and FC-hybrid can be -– and one or the other should be -– applied nationally and reduce disputes over segment types; yes, I know not every place has county roads, but they do have functional (ha!) equivalents

- Use caution with any rule set that necessitates numerous exceptions; when exceptions outnumber the rules, then the rules were faulty to begin with

=========================================

Lastly, neither KISS nor FC (hybrid or pure) work for the best route from the Florida Gulf Coast to Montgomery, AL. There’s a 20-mile stretch of 4-lane, 65mph (75+ on good day!) Alabama state highway in the middle of nowhere rated as “rural minor arterial,” mH. For routing to work (yes, I have experimented), it has to be MH, which means the FC would have to be “rural principal arterial” for me to legitimately change it to MH. (Google Maps gets this routing right.) I changed it back to mH even though the reality is MH.

So whether KISS or FC-hybrid, I expect national consistency from any GPS product. Waze used to be focused on the local commuter, but now they have matured so a national standard is needed.
Given a choice between exceptions or standardization, I choose standardization and accepting that road segments may not always be represented by their ideal classification or produce Google Map quality routing.

By the way, please keep the current (larger) font size. You young’uns will understand someday.

Kudos to sketch for getting FC-hybrid discussion this far.
GC, New England ARC, Veteran, CISSP, MCP
banished
Waze Global Champs
Waze Global Champs
 
Posts: 1226
Joined: Mon Sep 28, 2009 11:03 am
Has thanked: 245 times
Been thanked: 208 times

PreviousNext

Return to US Wiki Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: buckeyemondo