|
|
| (126 intermediate revisions by one other user not shown) |
| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
| {{construction
| | Please see the official and maintained version of this page: [[Edits to avoid]] |
| | contact = https://www.waze.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=276&t=99127
| |
| | contacttype = forum
| |
| | draft = yes
| |
| | open = no
| |
| }}
| |
| | |
| If you were advised to read this wiki, it means another editor believes some of your edits to the Waze map are incorrect. Those edits may already have been modified or deleted. This may be an unpleasant surprise, especially if you put a lot of time and energy into those edits, but rest assured that you are in good company. Every one of Waze's many volunteer editors has made mistakes that required correction or removal.
| |
| | |
| The purpose of this wiki is to help you understand what about your edits may have needed undoing and to offer you suggestions on where your editing energy could do the most good.
| |
| | |
| {{TOC}}
| |
| | |
| == Incorrect edits are a natural part of Waze ==
| |
| | |
| Having edits undone or redone may make you feel like being a Waze editor is not for you. That's a sensible response, but actually, Waze and the volunteer editing community need you.
| |
| | |
| It is so important to Waze to encourage new editors that they deliberately omit any training requirements to get started. Without any information, practice, or tests -- in fact within minutes of discovering Waze -- you can begin modifying Waze's maps. This is exciting, but it also means you will make mistakes. We all do.
| |
| | |
| Incorrect edits are a natural part of Waze. So please don't feel bad.
| |
| | |
| == What did I do wrong? ==
| |
| | |
| Incorrect edits include both functional mistakes and misunderstood conventions. Functional mistakes are more serious but both require response.
| |
| | |
| === Functional mistakes ===
| |
| | |
| A functional error introduces wrong or incomplete data or faulty routing. Functional errors must be addressed as soon as possible after they are detected. If your incorrect edit was a functional mistake the editor who discovered it has already taken steps to fix it.
| |
| | |
| ==== Red roads ====
| |
| [[File:RoadPicN2.jpg|right|300px|RoadPicN2.jpg]]
| |
| Roads that appear bright red in the editor were published before all necessary parameters were set properly. These roads will appear on the Waze client but are useless for routing. Their prominent display calls attention to incomplete edits. See the [[Map_Editing_Quick-start_Guide | Map Editing Quick-start Guide]] for details.
| |
| | |
| <i>Response: If the "red road" appears to indicate a drivable and routable road, complete it as necessary. Try to preserve the creator's name out of respect for their having found the omission and attempted to remedy it. Do not automatically delete red roads! They may reflect construction that occurred since the satellite and/or street-view imagery was acquired. If the red road is clearly spurious, delete it.</i>
| |
| {{clear}}
| |
| | |
| ==== Misplaced roundabouts ====
| |
| [[File:RoadPicN2.jpg|right|300px|RoadPicN2.jpg]]
| |
| The Waze roundabout tool creates an intersection that gives roundabout-specific routing instructions to drivers. It should only be used for real roundabout intersections with three or more exits! It does not belong at cul-de-sacs, decorative entrance driveways, or traffic calming circles without roundabout signs. It is also inappropriate for large traffic circles with street names of their own. It goes without saying that it should never be used for an ordinary intersection, as the routing instructions will confuse drivers.
| |
| | |
| <i>Response: If the satellite image leaves any doubt at all, use Street View to verify that no signs suggestive of a roundabout are present. If it is a roundabout, ensure the layout matches the desired roundabout routing behavior, either orthogonal or odd-angle. If it not a roundabout, delete it and repair any associated connections.</i>
| |
| {{clear}}
| |
| | |
| ==== Overlapping segments ====
| |
| [[File:RoadPicN2.jpg|right|300px|RoadPicN2.jpg]]
| |
| There should be only one segment representing a given length of street. Overlapping segments wreak havoc with the routing and house-numbering systems. Sometimes editors create overlapping segments because they don't know how to modify the existing segment, or find it is locked above their level. The correct approach is to seek help, not to add a new segment on top of an existing one.
| |
| | |
| <i>Response: Identify the overlapping segment -- typically the one without house numbering and/or with improper connections to other nearby segments -- and delete it.</i>
| |
| {{clear}}
| |
| | |
| ==== Disconnected/disjoint segments ====
| |
| [[File:RoadPicN2.jpg|right|300px|RoadPicN2.jpg]]
| |
| Just because segments appear to intersect doesn't mean they really do. A proper intersection will display all turn restrictions if any connecting segment is selected. A segment that only appears to connect will not only fail to route but will also confuse editors trying to understand the failure.
| |
| | |
| <i>Response: If the intersection appears valid and the segment is correct, routable, and complies with conventions, connect the segment and set turn restrictions appropriately. If the intersection is not valid but the segments are correct, space them so it will be obvious to other editors that they do not connect, and consider locking them to be sure they stay that way. Otherwise delete the segment.</i>
| |
| {{clear}}
| |
| | |
| ==== Corrupted turn restrictions ====
| |
| [[File:RoadPicN2.jpg|right|300px|RoadPicN2.jpg]] | |
| Sometimes when modifying an intersection an editor will, through accident or lack of awareness, leave important turn restrictions red. This will prevent routing on the affected segments. In the worst cases significant roads may be effectively closed to Wazers, who are instead detoured through adjacent neighborhoods.
| |
| | |
| <i>Response: Correct the turn restrictions as soon as possible.</i>
| |
| {{clear}}
| |
| | |
| ==== Critical segments missing ====
| |
| [[File:RoadPicN2.jpg|right|300px|RoadPicN2.jpg]]
| |
| It should go without saying that a road will not route if it does not go through, but it happens that editors delete or leave out critical segments.
| |
| | |
| <i>Response: Replace the missing segments and verify turn restrictions as soon as possible.</i>
| |
| {{clear}}
| |
| | |
| ==== Failed editing due to locked segments ====
| |
| [[File:RoadPicN2.jpg|right|300px|RoadPicN2.jpg]]
| |
| The more significant the road, the more likely it is to be locked so that only higher-ranking editors can modify it. It is impossible for a junior editor to attach new segments to a locked road, although they can and do try, leading to disconnected/disjoint segments as described above.
| |
| | |
| <i>Response: Contact an editor of the necessary Rank to fix the area.</i>
| |
| {{clear}}
| |
| | |
| ==== Excessive or misaligned geometry nodes ====
| |
| [[File:RoadPicN2.jpg|right|300px|RoadPicN2.jpg]]
| |
| Use only the minimum number of geometry nodes to match the road. Excessive nodes slow the display and make the segment harder to edit, while misaligned nodes affect display aesthetics and in extreme cases ruin Waze's ability to determine what road a driver is on.
| |
| | |
| <i>Response: Remove excessive geometry nodes (using mouse-hover and the 'd' key) and correct misaligned nodes.</i>
| |
| {{clear}}
| |
| | |
| ==== Cowboy road splitting ====
| |
| [[File:RoadPicN2.jpg|right|300px|RoadPicN2.jpg]]
| |
| Just because a road is divided by a median strip in reality is not enough reason to split it in Waze! Splitting roads can cause a great deal of trouble and should not be attempted without great care and adequate preparation. Always check with the local Area Manager before splitting any road.
| |
| | |
| <i>Response: Check with the local area manager or a champ. Unsplitting roads can cause as many headaches as splitting them in the first place. Do not automatically assume that a newly-split road is incorrect, even if the split was performed poorly or by a novice editor.</i>
| |
| {{clear}}
| |
| | |
| ==== Unnecessary and/or connected walking paths ====
| |
| [[File:RoadPicN2.jpg|right|300px|RoadPicN2.jpg]]
| |
| Walking paths are not benign! Waze will route drivers over them! Even when not connected to the drivable road network, walking paths that come too close to drivable destinations can corrupt routing results. In addition to their potential effects on routing, walking paths may encourage people to use Waze while walking or bicycling, a practice that can significantly damage Waze's traffic detection since Waze will think traffic is slow. Editors should not create walking paths to support people using Waze while walking or bicycling! That includes adding segments to respond to automated Map Problem reports generated by people using Waze while walking or bicycling. There are few circumstances that call for the mapping of walking paths.
| |
| | |
| <i>Response: First of all, unless this is one of a tiny handful of cases where a walking path is required to reach a destination, disconnect the path from any drivable road segments. If there is any chance the walking path could confuse drivers or distort local routing, delete it. If the path is sufficiently isolated so as not to cause routing problems and it is named (e.g. "Los Gatos Creek Trl"), consider leaving it, particularly near any parking for the path, as its name may be used as a search term. Also consider leaving walking paths used by Wazers that have long parallel stretches alongside roads; if we can't stop people from using Waze while walking or biking, we may as well reduce the likelihood they will corrupt speed data for adjacent segments. Unnamed walking paths that do not get used by Wazers should be deleted; they may not appear to be doing any harm, but their presence encourages other editors to add to the paths or create new ones.</i>
| |
| {{clear}}
| |
| | |
| ==== Unnecessary private alleys and driveways ====
| |
| [[File:RoadPicN2.jpg|right|300px|RoadPicN2.jpg]]
| |
| New editors often believe that if you can drive it, you should map it. This perspective is not only a recipe for spaghetti maps, it can break routing. For example, if you add a private road to your house, Wazers visiting your neighbors may find themselves routed up your driveway. If you add a private alley that connects two streets through a warehouse district, a delivery person near the alley may be snapped to that alley and given an impossible route. In general, you should map roads because they are necessary for routing and not simply because they are there.
| |
| | |
| <i>Response: If the road does not comply with the wiki for private access roads and driveways, delete it. If it appears to comply but causes routing issues that cannot be improved with additional compliant roads, that calls for deletion as well.</i>
| |
| {{clear}}
| |
| | |
| ==== Unnecessary at-grade connectors ====
| |
| [[File:RoadPicN2.jpg|right|300px|RoadPicN2.jpg]]
| |
| At-grade connectors are not necessary unless the driver needs advance warning of a turn. Unnecessary at-grade connectors are more trouble to analyze and maintain, and their close proximity to the through road from which they split can lead Waze to snap drivers to the wrong road. Asking for a route while snapped to the wrong road will result in incorrect routing.
| |
| | |
| <i>Response: Delete the at-grade connector as well as any newly-unnecessary junction nodes that result, and verify turn restrictions.</i>
| |
| {{clear}}
| |
| | |
| ==== Misuse or overuse of the Ramp road type ====
| |
| [[File:RoadPicN2.jpg|right|300px|RoadPicN2.jpg]]
| |
| Ramps are appropriate only for limited situations. If a novice editor uses the Ramp road type it is likely to be a mistake.
| |
| | |
| <i>Response: Change to the correct road type and rework if necessary, or delete.</i>
| |
| {{clear}}
| |
| | |
| === Misunderstood conventions ===
| |
| | |
| Misunderstood conventions do not necessarily involve wrong data or faulty routing, but violate editing conventions agreed upon by the local Waze editing community.
| |
| | |
| ==== Excessive parking-lot roads ====
| |
| [[File:RoadPicN2.jpg|right|300px|RoadPicN2.jpg]]
| |
| While mapping every lane in a parking lot does not cause functional problems, it does create a busy appearance in the client display that is completely unnecessary for routing. By convention the Waze editing community only maps the minimum number of parking-lot roads necessary to ensure proper routing to and from destinations.
| |
| | |
| <i>Response: Delete extraneous parking-lot roads.</i>
| |
| {{clear}}
| |
| | |
| ==== Misuse of the Parking-Lot Area Place ====
| |
| [[File:RoadPicN2.jpg|right|300px|RoadPicN2.jpg]]
| |
| The Waze Map Editor gives easy and prominent access to the Parking-Lot Area Place directly from the create menu. In most urban or suburban neighborhoods, however, mapping every parking lot would create a vast ocean of parking. To simplify the maps, the Waze editing community only uses the Parking-Lot Area Place for <i>general-purpose parking accessible to the general public</i>. See the [[Places/Parking lot|Parking-Lot Area Place wiki]] for details. Hint: if you really did map general-purpose parking for the general public, the best way to reduce the chance it will be deleted is to assign the parking lot its documented name. Unnamed Parking-Lot Area Places are much more likely to be deleted.
| |
| | |
| <i>Response: If the parking lot complies with the wiki, ensure that the Name field shows its documented name, e.g. "City Lot #6". If the lot has a name but is for private or dedicated use only, you may consider converting it to a Point Place. Otherwise delete it.</i>
| |
| {{clear}}
| |
| | |
| ==== Misuse of Area Places ====
| |
| [[File:RoadPicN2.jpg|right|300px|RoadPicN2.jpg]]
| |
| By design, Area Places (formerly known as landmarks) render in the client and will be seen by drivers as well as editors. As a result, marking everything with an Area Place could lead to an excessively busy appearance and the disappearance of true landmarks amidst a sea of unremarkable locations. While controversy persists about the "right" density of Area Places, current guidance leans towards less dense. A detailed table in the [[Places|Places wiki]] says what is eligible for an Area Place.
| |
| | |
| <i>Response: If the Place is otherwise correct and compliant, convert it to a Point Place and adjust its location for best routing. Otherwise, delete it.</i>
| |
| {{clear}}
| |
| | |
| == What should I edit, then? ==
| |
| | |
| Your energy is always best focused on places you know. If you live and work in a heavily-populated area and your local neighborhoods have been edited and re-edited many times, there may be little left to do there aside from removing excessive geometry nodes, correcting minor misalignments, and verifying turn restrictions. Consider editing in less-traveled places you may have visited recently. Many more remote areas have seen little attention since the original base-map import. Remote areas often abound with misnamed roads, dirt roads misclassified as streets, improper turn restrictions and street directionality, roads shown as through that do not go through, and so on.
| |
| | |
| If you do choose to focus on a heavily-edited area, be aware that many have come before you and things that don't seem right at first may have resulted from days or even weeks of careful adjustment. Fixing things that aren't broken is not a good way to start.
| |
