Well, okay, let me tailor that a bit better. Accuracy should not be sacrificed for "efficiency".

I don't mean that we shouldn't use fewer nodes when mapping a given road or landmark or whatever, as long as it's accurate. But the decision whether to map at the fence line or the building edge shouldn't be decided based on the number of nodes. We should do whatever looks better and works better and makes more sense. We should still use only as many nodes as necessary to follow whichever line is best.

I think the questions for some of those are different than others. (For instance, where would we map parks other than at the fence line? A park is an area of land, not a building.)

I believe what would make Waze look a lot better while answering a lot of these questions — and I've said this before — is the ability to have a lighter-shaded "grounds"-type Place and a darker-shaded "building" place. Name the grounds "Lakeside Shopping Center" and leave the building blank; name the grounds "Tulane University" and the buildings "Reily Student Center" and "Diboll Complex" and "Weinmann Hall"; name the grounds "DTW – Detroit Metropolitan Wayne County Airport" and the buildings "North Terminal" and "McNamara Terminal"; and so forth.

Not that this can't be accomplished navigationally with stop points and point places, but it'd make identification of an airport vs. a mall vs. a college campus a lot easier.