Get a sneak peek at whats next for Permanent Hazards on our April 7th Office Hours!
This is the place to discuss issues that are relevant for locations in the US. For any other discussions, please use the main forums.

Post Reply

TTS exit announcements

Post by dbraughlr
The TTS exit announcements should be reformulated.
"In one mile, right Exit to Kindergarten Ct."
"Stay right for Exit to Kindergarten Ct."
"Take right Exit to Kindergarten Ct."


Exit ramp names: If the exit is not numbered, "Exit to Kindergarten Ct" will do.

This name sounds awkward when read as "Exit at Exit to Kindergarten Ct".
dbraughlr
Posts: 569
Has thanked: 164 times
Been thanked: 98 times

POSTER_ID:16783633

1

Send a message

Post by AlanOfTheBerg
This post contains forward-looking information about adjusting TTS the way we want it, not about kludging the current.
--
For numbered exits, which start with "Exit 20A: " I would favor with keeping the current verbiage when actually at the junction: "Exit to the right at Exit 20A" and then adding "Exit to the left at Exit 20A" and NOT saying the full exit segment name unless it has never been said before (too close to previous junction to have more than one announcement).

For numbered exists, I would like to see pre-announcements (prior to the junction) to say simply, "In x minutes, you will be exiting to the left/right at Exit 20A: ..." This uses current beta app TTS of using time instead of distance.

For unnumbered exits, I would favor changing TTS to ignore the "Exit to" portion of the segment name for the ramp, just like it ignores the word "to" for on-ramp names. The spoken phrase would then be "Exit to the right at Franklin St" or "Exit to the left at Franklin St" where the segment name is "Exit to Franklin St".

Pre-announcement TTS would say "In x minutes, you will be exiting to the left/right at Frankin St"


Do I need to provide examples of my ideas here?
AlanOfTheBerg
EmeritusChamps
EmeritusChamps
Posts: 23627
Has thanked: 568 times
Been thanked: 3478 times
Send a message
Wiki Resources: Map Editing Manual | alanoftheberg@gmail.com
Oregon-based US Ex-Global Champ Editor | iPhone13Pro - VZ

Post by CBenson
I don't like this approach. There are plenty of interchanges around here between freeways where the ramps from one freeway to another are signed as an exit. The FC typing does not completely eliminate interchanges from MHs and ramps from MHs at such interchanges can again be signed as exits. Even at-grade connectors can be signed as exits as shown in the wiki.
CBenson
EmeritusChamps
EmeritusChamps
Posts: 10330
Has thanked: 608 times
Been thanked: 1642 times
Send a message
Regional Coordinator: Mid-Atlantic, US
Verizon, Nexus 6, Android 6.0.1, Waze 4.7.0.902

Post by ctpoole
It appears that FM is reading as Farm to Market once again.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
ctpoole
Posts: 404
Has thanked: 18 times
Been thanked: 158 times
Send a message
Area Manager: Austin, Southeast Texas and the Panhandle
https://s.waze.tools/c5.png

Post by davielde
dbraughlr wrote:The TTS exit announcements should be reformulated.
"In one mile, right Exit to Kindergarten Ct."
"Stay right for Exit to Kindergarten Ct."
"Take right Exit to Kindergarten Ct."
I know that the thread has focused on unnumbered exits, but just to clarify in the OP, were you also attempting to advocate changes to the instructions as well? Initially "Right [...]", then "Stay right for [...]", and finally "Take right [...]". Or were you simply paraphrasing the actual TTS?
davielde
Posts: 1219
Has thanked: 454 times
Been thanked: 735 times
Send a message
https://www.waze.com/wiki/images/6/69/W ... 00k_5c.png
CM: USA
SM: Michigan, Vermont
AM: Ann Arbor, MI & Thunder Bay, ON
WME Michigan

Post by davielde
TTS instructions are from the perspective of the road that you are currently travelling on, so "enter on the right" would not be consistent with all other instructions since it would consider where you'll be (freeway) rather than where you are (likely MH or mH in this case).

Otherwise, "exit to the right" versus "stay to the right" is a property of the road type at that angle. If the user wants a "turn right" and you think it's merited for that junction, give it to them.

For anyone who can chime in, how would something like this sound in the Beta right now?
davielde
Posts: 1219
Has thanked: 454 times
Been thanked: 735 times
Send a message
https://www.waze.com/wiki/images/6/69/W ... 00k_5c.png
CM: USA
SM: Michigan, Vermont
AM: Ann Arbor, MI & Thunder Bay, ON
WME Michigan

Post by davielde
dbraughlr wrote:Are you suggesting that we change the road type in order to give the desired "stay to the right" instruction?

Please refer to my scenario.
I was only re-stating that road type influences the TTS, not advocating a measure to force a "stay to the right".

Especially if this is in the context of a road that CalTrans or any other DOT considers a principal arterial, you would lose too much potential routing value overall by using PS simply for the "stay" instruction at this or a handful of junctions. If the angle is such where it has to say "exit", that's outside of our direct control, and waiting for a change there should not prevent us from improving routing where we do have control.
davielde
Posts: 1219
Has thanked: 454 times
Been thanked: 735 times
Send a message
https://www.waze.com/wiki/images/6/69/W ... 00k_5c.png
CM: USA
SM: Michigan, Vermont
AM: Ann Arbor, MI & Thunder Bay, ON
WME Michigan

Post by davielde
dbraughlr wrote:In other words, you were confirming the validity of the problem stated in my scenario where changing the read type has changed the instruction in a manner that makes no sense to drivers.
Not quite. I was confirming the validity of the change. As to whether it makes no sense to drivers and would therefore be a problem on a scale that would involve considering not upgrading the road, I'll leave that to your local judgment. There have been no URs that I've seen in my area regarding TTS complaints, and there are numerous opportunities for drivers to "exit" their current direction of travel.
davielde
Posts: 1219
Has thanked: 454 times
Been thanked: 735 times
Send a message
https://www.waze.com/wiki/images/6/69/W ... 00k_5c.png
CM: USA
SM: Michigan, Vermont
AM: Ann Arbor, MI & Thunder Bay, ON
WME Michigan

Post by davielde
dbraughlr wrote:Drivers don't like the new instruction. What can be done about it?
You've already rejected the valid workaround above. While your proposal may be simpler, obtaining results from Waze for the proposal would seem to be more difficult and time consuming than implementing PhantomSoul's stated workaround in a few places. It's nice to put on a list, but your drivers may not be willing to wait for Waze.
davielde
Posts: 1219
Has thanked: 454 times
Been thanked: 735 times
Send a message
https://www.waze.com/wiki/images/6/69/W ... 00k_5c.png
CM: USA
SM: Michigan, Vermont
AM: Ann Arbor, MI & Thunder Bay, ON
WME Michigan

Post by dbraughlr
Clarification: I favor all having the names of all exits start with the keyword Exit regardless of whether there is an exit number.
dbraughlr
Posts: 569
Has thanked: 164 times
Been thanked: 98 times
Send a message
Ѭ