Does it still make sense to even mark roads as unpaved in a region where main roads, often the only way to get between entire towns, are unpaved? In other words, if actual highways are unpaved, what's the relevance of trying to avoid unpaved roads?
https://images2.imgbox.com/6b/db/BSSGdrWs_o.pnghttps://s.waze.tools/coor.pnghttps://s.waze.tools/lcus.pnghttps://s.waze.tools/mntr.pnghttps://s.waze.tools/betc.png
https://s.waze.tools/c6.png
Waze Editing Manual | USA Road Types | USA Forum
Mint Mobile (T-Mobile) iPhone 15 Pro / iOS (latest) / Waze (latest/beta)
https://s.waze.tools/c6.png
Waze Editing Manual | USA Road Types | USA Forum
Mint Mobile (T-Mobile) iPhone 15 Pro / iOS (latest) / Waze (latest/beta)
I'm not sure how much value an editor-declared attribute here would add vs just the measured speeds of traffic along a given segment, vs the opportunities for vandalism or other misuse it would open up.ncc1701v wrote:4x4 i.e. "not suitable for ordinary cars" and pavement type are orthogonal attributes -- they do not depend on each other. I've been on roads in Brooklyn that I would consider not suitable for ordinary cars because of potholes, bumps, and miscellaneous car parts on them. We certainly want the first (4x4) to be independent, and probably a category along with "minor highway". Whether we want the second (pavement type) is not clear because the issues are not clear. The main justification seems to be that those roads are not well-used, so Waze's knowledge of them is questionable -- the pavement might be crap, they might be overgrown, etc. OK then, instead of "pavement type", how about a checkbox for "uncertain pavement quality"?
If a road is really beat up, wouldn't it stand to reason it's speed metrics would reflect that and the routing engine would probably avoid it anyway?
https://images2.imgbox.com/6b/db/BSSGdrWs_o.pnghttps://s.waze.tools/coor.pnghttps://s.waze.tools/lcus.pnghttps://s.waze.tools/mntr.pnghttps://s.waze.tools/betc.png
https://s.waze.tools/c6.png
Waze Editing Manual | USA Road Types | USA Forum
Mint Mobile (T-Mobile) iPhone 15 Pro / iOS (latest) / Waze (latest/beta)
https://s.waze.tools/c6.png
Waze Editing Manual | USA Road Types | USA Forum
Mint Mobile (T-Mobile) iPhone 15 Pro / iOS (latest) / Waze (latest/beta)
Good point! And with that I'd say end of discussionCBenson wrote:Any definition needs to apply worldwide and I suspect that unpaved highways do exist.PhantomSoul wrote:I would think that any unpaved road, by definition, cannot be a highway.
Sent from my SPH-D710 using Tapatalk 2
Area Manager: Pinellas, Pasco & Hillsborough Counties FL
Phone: Samsung GS 2, Sprint, Android 4.1.2
Waze: 3.7.2
Waze FAQ...Best Map Editing Practice...Correct Server?...User Manual
Phone: Samsung GS 2, Sprint, Android 4.1.2
Waze: 3.7.2
Waze FAQ...Best Map Editing Practice...Correct Server?...User Manual
I have to get over there and check it out. A state highway on the sand? Sounds fun.
Just to add my vote, I also think there should a checkbox for unpaved (or a dropdown - paved or unpaved with paved as the default). I don't mind driving on gravel/dirt roads in my car. But I wouldn't want to drive on a rough two track (aka 4x4 road) with my car. It would also make it so the road display could remain the type of road (street, highway, etc.) if it's passable for basically any kind of car or truck and only change to the 4x4 road display we have if it's not necessarily passable by everyone. That would make it look better on the map.
Just to add my vote, I also think there should a checkbox for unpaved (or a dropdown - paved or unpaved with paved as the default). I don't mind driving on gravel/dirt roads in my car. But I wouldn't want to drive on a rough two track (aka 4x4 road) with my car. It would also make it so the road display could remain the type of road (street, highway, etc.) if it's passable for basically any kind of car or truck and only change to the 4x4 road display we have if it's not necessarily passable by everyone. That would make it look better on the map.
https://www.waze.com/wiki/images/5/5a/W ... M_only.png
Previously Area Manager: Michigan - Northern LP.
Waze running on Samsung Galaxy S21+.
Previously Area Manager: Michigan - Northern LP.
Waze running on Samsung Galaxy S21+.
You gave good reasons to have it, though. Many people do not want to drive on a gravel/dirt road unless they absolutely have to. I see no reason not to have that be an option for them. Marking a road as paved or not is easy to do and easy to update if it ever needs updating. After all, the road looks different in the client, making it easy to see if it's wrong while you're driving. I personally drive on gravel and dirt roads and will also drive on two-tracks (4x4 roads) that aren't too bad for a car to handle, but I think most people prefer not to.troyv wrote:I guess I am not a real big fan of the "unpaved" attribute. I just don't see enough reason to have it.
I think having 2 separate attributes - unpaved and off-road to differentiate between what basically any vehicle could handle versus what only certain vehicles could handle - is a good option and really isn't a big deal to maintain. I still prefer a checkbox instead, though. If a private road is a dirt road, which takes precedence? If a highway is a dirt road, which takes precedence? Street type is most important, but many people would want to avoid an unpaved highway. If it's just another road type, you have no way to mark it as being both a highway and also being unpaved.
https://www.waze.com/wiki/images/5/5a/W ... M_only.png
Previously Area Manager: Michigan - Northern LP.
Waze running on Samsung Galaxy S21+.
Previously Area Manager: Michigan - Northern LP.
Waze running on Samsung Galaxy S21+.
It was strongly implied at the meetup that a best solution for this is to use time based turn restrictions (when implemented) to a seasonal segment, along lines of:CBenson wrote: The other issue that comes to mind is that I have seen in reference to unpaved roads are roads that are only open seasonally. Is this something that should be addressed within the options for these road types, addressed with time based restrictions, or addressed manually as the roads open and close.
00:00-23:59 from November 1 to March 31 each year.
https://www.waze.com/wiki/images/2/2a/W ... 00k_5c.png
AM in SW Shasta, NW Tehama, Central Trinity Counties, CA; Mt Rainier Nat'l Park, WA
AM in SW Shasta, NW Tehama, Central Trinity Counties, CA; Mt Rainier Nat'l Park, WA
I think it'd actually be pretty easy to implement. They already did this with toll roads. All they'd do is more or less copy the code that said 'avoid segments with flag TOLL', and replace it with 'avoid segments with flag 'UNPAVED', or whatever. There's no reinventing the wheel here.AlanOfTheBerg wrote:Take a read here: http://www.waze.com/forum/viewtopic.php ... 33#p385433
What is brought up is a good point and one I think we should carefully consider.
There can be all sorts of "unpaved" roadways from city streets, primary streets and highways. "Unpaved" is more of a surface treatment. Whereas "4x4/Offroad" is more of a type of roadway. I think the suggestion has a lot of merit. The problem is, is that it will likely take Waze more time to implement a new checkbox and possibly add app/routing features to allow us to route around such areas.
That said, I've done a lot of thinking about this subject recently, and I think I am now putting in my opinion as 'I think this should be a checkbox, not a road type'. On the top end (where we have the option to avoid freeways), I think editors are in pretty clear agreement as to what a freeway and major highway is, and on the other side, a client user ALSO understands what it means to say 'Avoid major highways'.
On the low end, however, we have 'dirt/4x4/unpaved/whatever we ultimately call it', 'street', and 'primary street'. Waze's own Wiki description admits that a primary street to give one example can be 'a dirt road through a town', and in Western states, there ARE good examples of roads that will cut off hundreds of miles and may even be faster - but is not ideal for someone who doesn't carry their own gasoline or wants something to eat along the way.
The US is a huge country; it's possible to find dirt roads that are long enough that if Waze routed a user onto it, they'd not be able to get gas from 'full tank to empty'. However, they ALSO are 'that one way to that little town somewhere'.
I'd like to suggest the term 'Avoid primitive roads' for a checkbox. or similar verbiage, and that this box be checked by default on install (or in a user's saved settings in the cloud). Primitive CAN mean 'unpaved' OR '4x4' (which is the typical thing people will think of when they see 'primitive road', and it keeps it simple. They get three choices: 'Toll', 'Major highways', and 'Primitive roads'.
This way, we can in fact have primary roads or even minor arterials that are dirt, one lane, whatever...BUT...this means that a Waze user understands that if they uncheck the box, they may be on roads that...well...can get ugly.
https://www.waze.com/wiki/images/2/2a/W ... 00k_5c.png
AM in SW Shasta, NW Tehama, Central Trinity Counties, CA; Mt Rainier Nat'l Park, WA
AM in SW Shasta, NW Tehama, Central Trinity Counties, CA; Mt Rainier Nat'l Park, WA
Admittedly, I do much of my editing out in California and Washington, where a major arterial road in funtional classification is usually a 'Very long range point to point road that is not a freeway', and there hasn't been much disagreement there, particularly as they tend to be fewer and further between. Out east I could imagine this could get a lot more contentious, especially where several roads are nearby one another with similar characteristics. 'Which is the major one?' and so forth.CBenson wrote:As an aside I'm surprised by the following statement:I pretty much think that major highway is the road type with the least agreement among users and editors.skbun wrote:I think editors are in pretty clear agreement as to what a freeway and major highway is, and on the other side, a client user ALSO understands what it means to say 'Avoid major highways'.
https://www.waze.com/wiki/images/2/2a/W ... 00k_5c.png
AM in SW Shasta, NW Tehama, Central Trinity Counties, CA; Mt Rainier Nat'l Park, WA
AM in SW Shasta, NW Tehama, Central Trinity Counties, CA; Mt Rainier Nat'l Park, WA
There is a standing request which started with the US 2013 meetup in February to do the following:troyv wrote:Aren't we getting too complicated on all these road designations and characteristics?
I generally think what we have now is acceptable. The only thing I would change is to rename "Dirt/4x4 road" to just "4x4 road", and remove the "service road" designation. In general, I don't think the user really cares about the surface of the road.
- Eliminate the 'service road' road type
- Rename 'Dirt/4x4 road' to 'Unpaved'
- Add a new type called '4x4/offroad/I-forget-the-exact-word', an even "lower" class than 'Unpaved'.
Doing this would still allow users to use the checkboxes that say 'Avoid unpaved roads' or 'Avoid long ones' meaningfully, while also keeping it simple for the user. As far as I know there is no ETA on these changes being made.
https://www.waze.com/wiki/images/2/2a/W ... 00k_5c.png
AM in SW Shasta, NW Tehama, Central Trinity Counties, CA; Mt Rainier Nat'l Park, WA
AM in SW Shasta, NW Tehama, Central Trinity Counties, CA; Mt Rainier Nat'l Park, WA
I have read posts in the New Zealand forums where minor/major highways are unpaved / dirt /gravel and I think that is why the check box was brought up as a way to indicate it being a dirt road vs being a drop down road type. 4x4 roads were decided to be a road drop down type since most people who choose to drive those kind of roads has the vehicle to be able to drive them. I think "primitave" roads would fall under the 4x4 road type. Isn't this what was agreed on in the meetup and wasn't that the plan of action by Waze or was this when the discussion started to de-evolve?
Re: Unpaved as a checkbox instead of road type?