[Script] WME Validator v2020.11.1 (PLACES BETA)

[davidg666]

Would you consider adding country-specific checks for Ireland? I'm thinking of anything that catches road segments that don't comply with our road type wiki page:

https://www.waze.com/wiki/How_to_label_ ... s_(Ireland)

...for example:

- Only motorways (name begins with Mn or Mnn (eg M6, M18 or M50)) should have Freeway type.
- Only national routes (name begins with Nn or Nnn (eg N5, N21, etc)) should have Major Highway type.
- All Rnnn routes (name begins with Rnnn (eg R521, R448, etc)) should have Minor Highway type (note that some link segments to R- routes can have this type too, so the check should be that a road whose name begins Rnnn has this type, not that roads of this type must begin Rnnn)
- Names in parentheses after city names *are* valid (for example "Blackwater (Wexford)"). We use this to disambiguate city names when there is more than one city/town/village with the same name. The name in parentheses is the county name for the duplicate city. This is only for duplicate city names, not all city names.
- Cardinal direction indicators on motorways (such as the 'N' in "M7 N") are never in parentheses.[/list]

thanks!

++David \davidg666

[davidg666]

Would you consider adding country-specific checks for Ireland?

Sure, let's do it!

Excellent - thank you!

Only motorways (name begins with Mn or Mnn (eg M6, M18 or M50)) should have Freeway type.

Shall we check if a Mnn road is Motorway, if a Motorway is named Mnn or both?

Both, I reckon: check that all roads beginning Mnn are of type Freeway, and all roads of type Freeway begin with Mnn.

Names in parentheses after city names *are* valid (for example "Blackwater (Wexford)").

Sure, Validator reports incorrect city name only if it sees "Blackwater (Wexford)" and "Blackwater" names during the same map scan. You can use "Clear report" button to clear the city cache.

Please give me a permalink if you have a problem with this check.

Ah, OK - I thought I'd seen it complaining about a town with this pattern in its name. I'll keep an eye out and see if I notice it again, and give you a permalink if it does.

Cardinal direction indicators on motorways (such as the 'N' in "M7 N") are never in parentheses.

So, Motorways are either 'Mxx' or 'Mxx[space]<N, S, W or E>'

Yes - the cardinal direction should *almost* always be there (because motorways are always split) however motorways *occasionally* end with a roundabout or a short two-way stretch that doesn't have a cardinal direction.

Majors are 'Nxx' or 'Nxx[space]<local name, i.e. letters, digits, spaces or dots>'

Almost, except that major highways can also have cardinal directions (just like motorways) when they're split. (although I guess the regex that matches 'Nxx[space]<local name, i.e. letters, digits, spaces or dots>' would also match 'Nxx[space]<cardinal direction>' too, so that's fine).

Minos are 'Rxxx' or 'Rxxx[space]<local name, i.e. letters, digits, spaces or dots>'

Exactly! (split minor highways can also have cardinal directions (just like major highways) but the pattern for local name should match that too.

Thank you!

++David \ davidg666

[davidg666]

if you are entering the roundabout from south (selected segment), it is not possible to exit immediately to the right. for those direction there is separate lane.
in current solution, the turn from segment entering roundabout to the outbound segment is disabled, what causes, that for this particular entrance the exit is not counted but for all other inboud segments the exit is counted. in my opinion this is correct setup, but the wiki states otherwise.

what would you think? is this an error? should it be treated different way?

Does this roundabout give the correct turn instructions? I've seen roundabouts with two segments connected to the same node that give 0-exit instructions for routes in all directions - and the roundabout reverted to giving proper instructions when each segment was given its own node on the roundabout.

++David \ davidg666

[davidg666]

I would like to suggest two new checks:

• ...
• Two-way ramp
  severity: warning
  problem: Most ramps are one-way. A two-way ramp is possible, but should be examined.

Ich would like to oppose this one. In Germany, we frequently KISS Ramps, if the two driveways are merely separated by road markings. Getting all those marked would lead to - well - challenges.

I'd like to oppose this too; the motorway network in Ireland is fairly young, and two-way ramps are quite common on some interchanges.

++David \ davidg666

[davidg666]

Thanks for all the work so far! Something I've noticed in one of the country-specific checks you made for Ireland: this segment here reports "Incorrect Major Highway name" because of the fada (accent) in its name. The correct name is "N62 Cúchulainn", but if that's changed to "N62 Cuchulainn" (removing the accent on the first 'u') then Validator doesn't think it's incorrect any more.

Irish placenames use similar (but not all the same) characters as English placenames; as well as the usual [a-zA-Z] characters, fadas (accents) on vowels are also valid: [áéíóúÁÉÍÓÚ].

++David \ davidg666

[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

[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

[davielde]

I currently get an indicator that a median u-turn segment is too short when it is actually a one way cross street that intersects with a split road. No direct left turn is enabled from the split road onto the cross street, so it's not technically a u-turn segment. Would it be possible to disable this when the street name of the "u-turn" segment is different from the intersecting road (and not "no street" or "u-turn" as well), when there are more than three segments intersecting at a junction, or some better solution? On tapatalk, so no permalink right now unfortunately.

[davielde]

I currently get an indicator that a median u-turn segment is too short when it is actually a one way cross street that intersects with a split road.

Sorry, I would appreciate a permalink. I'm looking into the code and the situation you describe is impossible

Now that I think it through, I believe that it was most likely a connectivity issue with the cross street segments that was causing the "u-turn" warning. The issues are reported in separate sections of the Validator report, but I clicked on the u-turn warning and likely fixed the glaring red connectivity issue at the same time. The u-turn problem was what stayed on the brain because it is more unique, whereas I've been fixing tons of connectivity problems recently.

Awesome tool!

[davielde]

Another request
Is it possible to get a report when roads are connected to driveable roads with a specific streetname?

In this case the following:
busbaan
spoorlijn
tram
metro

Those should never be connected to driveable segments.

Could that either be country-specific or provide the option to enable only certain street names? We have a "Metro Parkway" that is the official name and is a major highway.