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

[herrchin]

If those are the names of the roads, then those are the names You wouldn't want to alter them to something else that isn't going to be matched by people searching for those roads.

I will caution that I know Waze TTS sometimes doesn't handle those perfectly or even guaranteed to be consistent (The "let's take blah blah" initial announcements vs. "turn right on blah blah" for example; sometimes those pronunciations can differ. I have an "A St" which is pronounced as both a long "A" sound and as "uh" depending on where Waze is using it).

"Fire route one ninety nine point one" and "Fire route one ninety nine one see" (no "point") are what I get on a quick test. I'd call that good enough for a Wazer to understand though.

[houstonmg]

if I turn off the script. does not need to be on every time I press a new permalink.
MG

[houstonmg]

Same all.......

[houstonmg]

Some notice about the reported behavior in the beta editor?
MG

[iainhouse]

All the U-turns and unconfirmed turn highlighting has been removed. Thank you.

Could we please have the highlighting of dead-end u-turns turned back on for the UK, please?

As discussed elsewhere on the forums, we still consider them a real problem. We had Waze mass-disable every u-turn on the UK map. Unfortunately, the routing engine keeps enabling new ones where the disabled u-turn is "soft". With the arrows already removed, it will be difficult to diagnose problems involving u-turns unless we can see them, not to mention the routing problems we still see them causing.

[iainhouse]

Could we please have the highlighting of dead-end u-turns turned back on for the UK, please?

I guess you can still use a custom check for that (i.e. match deadEndA&UturnA or deadEndB&UturnB).

Let me know if you still would like to get those checks back for UK.

Yes please. I wouldn't ask, except I know you already have the infrastructure for making checks country-specific.

Also, I'm already using both custom checks and constantly resisting the temptation to ask you to add more.

[iainhouse]

Problem: WME hangs.

When: If I create a new segment connected to a newly added segment.

This pretty much matches my experience, although I hadn't determined the exact circumstances - or connected it to Validator.

[iainhouse]

Hey there. I just wanted to say it's good to see you back here.

I hope that whatever was keeping you busy in "real life" has now calmed down somewhat.

[iainhouse]

I don't believe there is any particular "resistance" to a tab. The situation is really very simple:

An entirely unpaid Waze editor has decided to develop an incredibly useful tool for the entire community, but does not currently have much time to devote to it.

This is obvious, if nothing else, from the fact that fixes for this script following WME changes have been pretty slow in recent months. Berestovskyy stated somewhere earlier in this thread that he had previously looked at putting Validator in a tab and will do so again. If he doesn't want to, or doesn't have the time to look at it, then that is entirely his prerogative.

The request for being in a tab has been made and acknowledged. Please people - asking once or twice is just asking. Asking again and again is nagging and I, for one, would not respond well to that. My response would likely be "You don't like it? Stop using it and develop your own". But then I'm a grumpy old git.

[iainhouse]

If validator didn't have a note specifically written in its code that says not to modify it i'd have already worked towards making a tab on my own time. I have other script writing individuals that are willing to help me with this. but with respect to the dev its HIS script. HE wrote in the script code to NOT MODIFY IT. well with this mentality i will happily stop asking and hammering my point across and just modify the code. Thanks.

The only point you're hammering across is that the unpaid developer of this script isn't working fast enough for your impatience and that you will therefore disrespect his wishes as to the modification of the code.

If the mentality you don't like is the developer's, then you don't like someone who gives you something for free that isn't up to your standards. If it's my mentality you don't like, well I couldn't care less. I have often stood up for the script developers and will continue to do so. There is little that angers me more than editors who feel they have some sort of right to complain about the generosity of a member of this community.