-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 64
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
How to deal with Arrivals? #61
Comments
For option 1, we should use the imperative like in every other instruction, not present tense. So: "Arrive at your final destination". |
Just a note on 3 because I think there is some context needed here on how we encode instructions:
That means for the a normal route we would see this a as the last two instructions:
The information that the arrival will happen in 200m is already encoded in the previous instruction. Inserting a new instruction type between those instructions would break the convention that an Hence I agree with @freenerd's assessment that 3 would be a complicated addition to OSRM and IMHO probably more confusing then helping. |
At least in English, the imperative form would be logical (since the user has to actively arrive at the waypoint), consistent with all the other instructions, and compatible with distance-based instructions:
|
I'm no linguist, but as a native English(AU) speaker:
sounds more natural. I don't know why, but "arrive at your destination" alone is awfully....authoritative. |
Here’s a less authoritative-sounding alternative:
|
How about: 🎉 another on time arrival powered by Mapbox (anyone took a Ryanair flight, ever?) I remember hearing stuff like I would not use So I'd prefer @1ec5 suggestion for early information and possibly two sentences for the actual arrival (here no major maneuver has to take place anymore).
|
Mainly I find the use of present perfect tense (“have arrived”, “have reached”) to be awkward or overly dispassionate. Is it strictly necessary to say “arrive” or “reach”? Maybe this is a difference between what a user would expect in a Web interface versus in voice guidance, or just my American bias. But this feels a lot more natural to me:
(or: You made it! 🎉😄) In any case, #88 means we can only provide one instruction that would be used both before and during arrival. A client such as the Mapbox Navigation SDK for iOS could work around this problem by providing its own pre-arrival string instead of going through this library. |
Currently we have one step in OSRM for the arrival. We are emitting one instruction for it:
To deal correctly with arrivals, we would actually need TWO instructions though, one after the last instruction before arrival, one on arrival:
In 200 meters, you will arrive at your destination, on the left
You have arrived at your destination, on the left
There are several solutions here:
In 200 meters, you arrive at your destination, on the left
You arrive at your destination, on the left
For now I'd go with option 1.
/cc @MoKob @daniel-j-h @TheMarex @danpat @1ec5 @willwhite @pveugen
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: