But from a wiki writing perspective, Karen did not use the word "impossible." I don't see an advantage to equating a hard turn restriction to a disconnected segment in the wiki.
Currently the proposal is to state that routing through a hard restricted turn is prohibited or prevented.
"Hard restrictions prevent routing through the turn."
The routing effect of hard restricted turns is "prohibited."
"Waze should not route through this [hard restricted] turn."
"Restricting a turn with a hard turn restriction prevents routes though that turn."
Is there any advantage to stating that routing through a hard turn restriction is impossible or is equivalent to disconnecting the segment? Is such a statement really true? As has been noted:
Currently the proposal is to state that routing through a hard restricted turn is prohibited or prevented.
"Hard restrictions prevent routing through the turn."
The routing effect of hard restricted turns is "prohibited."
"Waze should not route through this [hard restricted] turn."
"Restricting a turn with a hard turn restriction prevents routes though that turn."
Is there any advantage to stating that routing through a hard turn restriction is impossible or is equivalent to disconnecting the segment? Is such a statement really true? As has been noted:
So the question remains:top_gun_de wrote:the 100%-confirmation-statement uses the standard escape-word "should"
top_gun_de wrote:does that mean there might still be conditions where the accuracy of the statement is restricted?
Re: Waze Bug or Wiki Inaccurate on Restricted Turns