When a Map Comment (MC) has been entered and is nearing its expiration (2 weeks in advance or 1 week in advance), notify and/or place a note in the Feed of the expiring MC.

This would allow the editor to verify if the MC is still needed, extend it, and/or reconnect road segments where a long-term project may have warranted segment disconnects instead of long-term RTCs.

If roads were disconnected and the project is nearing completion, this would allow the editor to reconnect the segments and then add RTCs so routing could occur immediately upon the completion of the project instead of waiting on a tile update.

By: karlcr9911
Link to original suggestion: https://www.waze.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=1525&t=214139

Please add a way to mark some Map Comment (MC) points as "critical" (as opposed to "informational"), with increased visibility. Instead of a small white dot, for example, you could display a slightly larger black-and-white or red-and-white bullseye. You could perhaps even add (gentle!) animation, such as gradual pulsing.

Why do I suggest this? Several times now, I have encountered oversights by editors who seemed to have missed important information in a nearby MC Point. These well-intentioned but uninformed edits degraded the driver experience until they were discovered and repaired. I've asked around and have come to three conclusions:

(1) MC Points are not sufficiently visible to be sure of getting editors' attention.

(2) As a result of MC Points' poor visibility, some editors choose to create MC Areas instead of MC Points. But MC Areas are more intrusive than MC Points, so the proliferation of MC Areas degrades the editing experience and encourages editors to turn off the Comment layer more often.

3) Some MC Points provide less-important background information, for example the location of a mile marker that might be used by emergency services to identify that position on the roadway. It would be distracting for these background MC Points to be given high visibility, thus the need to differentiate between "critical" and "informational" MC Points.

Increasing the visibility of critical MC Points would improve their chances of being noticed and respected by visiting editors. It would also make MC Points an attractive alternative to MC Areas, leading to more judicious use of MC Areas.

There are many cases in highways where there is an on-ramp shortly followed by an off-ramp. In those cases, the right lane/s serve for those who get on the HW from the on-ramp, as well as those who get off the HW on the off-ramp.
A wazer that gets on the HW from the on-ramp and has to continue on the HW should get lane guidance to go onto the left lanes when approachng the next junction of the off-ramp, otherwise, he might continue on the right lanes and get off the HW.
A wazer that comes on the HW and approaches the off-ramp, but has to continue on the HW does not have to get lane guidance (it is disturbing to get lane guidance for every off-ramp on the HW).
The suggetion is to allow a conditional lane guidance that will allow to define separate lane guidance according to where the wazer came from (not to be confuzed with another suggestion to deal with lane guidance for a turn that will be taken later on).

I know, and have no issues with, that if you add/change a road shield on a segment it will add/change the road shield to every segment with the same streetID (same street name, city, state, country combination) no matter where it is (even if you you don't have edit rights in the area)

My issue is that I should not be able to go to an area, state, country that I have ZERO edit rights in and add/change their road shields.

My suggestion is that when you select a segment, if you can't make a normal edit to that segment, then the "add a road shield" option should also be able to be selected either. However, it should have a "view road shield" option instead.

So in short, if you meet the minimum requirement to add shields (L4 at this time) and the segment is within your editable area, you can add shields, otherwise you should only be able to view them.

WME shows two kinds of closures:
- effective closures, affecting routing and visible on livemap
- suggested closures, non affecting routing and not visible on livemap. Those suggested closures always have a duration equal to a multiple of 24 hours, starting and ending at the same time of day (on different days, obviously), and are usually created by editors having a layer lower than 3. Those suggested closures result from closure reports made from the app.
The WME displays both kind of closures using exact same visuals: it is necessary to open and examine the closure, to determine if it is effective or suggested.
I suggest enhancing the WME to allow visually identifying the type of closure.

Hi,
very often I am notified of an event that needs closure after it started, then I go to select the many segments that must be closed.
When I want to add a proper closure on them, there are already dozen of closure made by drivers and I have to remove all of them one by one before adding mine. That's annoying because it is slow, and sometimes new closure are made by drivers while I am removing them :

And overlapping closure are not a real problem because when it is done by waze app it happens often so it seems it is a check added by WME that lead only to bad ergonomy.

By: kpouer
Link to original suggestion: https://www.waze.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=1525&t=279796