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.
Fish don't know they're in water.