5 ms·

The dotted line is not directions. It just indicates that you can’t get to the destination by car so it brought you to the closest place and you’ll have to walk

The dotted line is not directions. It just indicates that you can’t get to the destination by car so it brought you to the closest place and you’ll have to walk the rest of the way. The dotted line is not walking directions but I guess I can see the confusion.

stingraycharles 5y ago
While you and I and many a HN reader will understand this, there is something to be said that people will, at some point, mistake this for an actual route and try to follow it.
- izacus 5y ago
  And that's on them isn't it? Is learning in how to read a map (Google or otherwise) seriously a too hard of an expectation from a person that goes mountain climbing?
monkeybutton 5y ago
Yes! I see this all the time when setting directions for provincial parks and other "remote" destinations. It never occurred to me that someone would blindly follow them.
- genewitch 5y ago
  I think part of the possible confusion is that "cutesy" curved line from the parking area to the peak. It shouldn't draw anything between where the actual directions end and the map pin, just show the pin. All that being said, changing the directions so it ends up at the visitor center is probably a good choice, regardless of how few people actually were or would be confused.
  - samatman 5y ago
    There are better ways to communicate this though. I'd consider a shaded-in area with wiggly outlines, big enough to be path shaped, that just says "walk". That conveys "you need to get yourself to this pin, and we don't know how to help you".
    - shock-value 5y ago
      I disagree. If Google doesn’t know enough about the walking path to even be able to plot it on the map, then they shouldn’t represent to users that there is a navigable path at all.
      - samatman 5y ago
        Yes, but if they know there's a navigable path but they don't know what it is this is a reasonable approach. Obviously, mapping a destination on an island with wiggly lines through the water which say "walk" would not be useful, but wasn't the situation I was envisioning.
- happytoexplain 5y ago
  It never occurred to you that somebody would "blindly" (what does that mean in this context?) follow a dotted line drawn on Google Maps? That's pretty unreasonable, to put it lightly. Blaming users for the consequences of bad UI is a huge problem in software.
  - labster 5y ago
    But I’m also confused that people will blindly follow turn-by-turn road directions too. Even when road signs disagree, even past road closed signs, even on gravel roads right before the first snowfall. People assume the computer knows the map and that the map is the territory. Yes, it’s terrible UI, but people don’t ask themselves if they interpret it wrong. At least you can fix the map; not sure how to fix the blind trust in humans.
minitoar 5y ago
Agreed, this is extremely confusing and a pretty big design flaw. Google Maps pops up a warning if the business you are traveling to is closing soon, or if there are tolls. It should show a warning in these situations where the road ends far from the destination. The heuristics are less obvious, but I think you could catch most cases. You could even prompt to add another section to the trip in walking mode.
toper-centage 5y ago
Most UX design makes lots of assumptions. Someone who is not familiar with Google maps could very well interpret the dotted grey arc as a real path. It's almost identical to the dotted blue path.
- burnished 5y ago
  How? I really do not see it. Like, I'm glad they are taking feedback and acting on it, but this seems like an overabundance of caution
  - eyelidlessness 5y ago
    If they routinely use maps for transit or walk any significant distance from a parking spot, they have a completely different expectation about what the dotted lines mean.
    - andi999 5y ago
      Actually I do think the expectation for the navigation to bring you to the point from where you can actually reach your target is justified. Like when you want to drive to say Disneyland it shd send you to a parking near the entrance not to a parking at the other side from where you cannot enter (but might be closer to the castle).
      - eyelidlessness 5y ago
        Huh
tobr 5y ago
How does it make sense to say “you have to walk the rest of the way” by drawing a line on a map, unless you intended it to imply that that’s the path to walk?
- treesprite82 5y ago
  Here's what that line looks like currently: https://i.imgur.com/tougs6p.png https://i.imgur.com/tougs6p.png (note: this is with the updated end-point at visitor center, probably won't have gone through loch previously) It's de-emphasised, doesn't show up in directions, is a perfectly smooth curve rather than conforming to paths/roads, and doesn't have the label saying to walk it. I think the vast majority of people would correctly interpret it as just showing the distance between the end-point and the destination set and I don't think it's necessarily bad UI. But still, with the popularity of Google maps and potential danger in misinterpreting it, it's probably worth considering ways to make it even clearer.
  - Sniffnoy 5y ago
    In order to look like it's indicating distance, it has to be a straight line, not a curve, and moreover actually have the distance written alongside it. That's at a minimum, I'd say; putting arrowheads on the ends might also help, e.g.
  - eyelidlessness 5y ago
    I can only tell it’s de-emphasized because I’ve been told it is. And while I have vision correction it’s reasonably up to date, and I’ve never suspected I have any kind of color blindness until reading this thread.
  - oarsinsync 5y ago
    > I think the vast majority of people would correctly interpret it as just showing the distance between the end-point and the destination set and I don't think it's necessarily bad UI. If this thread is anything to go by, slim majority at best. > But still, with the popularity of Google maps and potential danger in misinterpreting it, it's probably worth considering ways to make it even clearer. This is the really important point, and thank you for making it. Google Maps is used by 100 of millions (if not billions) of people. If these issues only impact 1% of users, that's still millions of people negatively impacted. At scale, even "niche" issues matter.
neltnerb 5y ago
This looks to me like an entirely valid hiking route that says to use actual marked foot trails on the ridge. If you have configured it for walking it definitely uses real trails from topographical maps. It wouldn't be outrageous to assume that Google will automatically switch from driving to walking mode at the best location to exit your vehicle. I would personally be double checking if I was confused but Google does do both things so it's easy to imagine Google being smart enough to combine the two now that it obscures so much of the interface. https://www.google.com/maps/dir/43.3518109,-71.7913173/43.3897258,-71.8553154/@43.3564428,-71.8354021,13.5z/data=!4m2!4m1!3e2!5m1!1e4 https://www.google.com/maps/dir/43.3518109,-71.7913173/43.38...
- missblit 5y ago
  I think there's a couple things here: A dotted blue path indicates a path to walk on. This shows up in public transit or walking directions where part of the trip actually involves walking. A dashed grey arc appears when Google Maps can't actually get you all the way to the destination but can get you close. This arc indicates distance, but not a particular route. This is what the screenshot in the article shows (except the screenshot shows light blue instead of grey for some reason). In particular note how the arc in the screenshot is perfectly smooth instead of following a path, a lighter color than the rest of the route, and dashed instead of dotted.
  - Dylan16807 5y ago
    And unless the user is really used to distinguishing between those two, having that with no further explanation is a terrible way to design a UI.
  - another-dave 5y ago
    "It wouldn't be outrageous to assume that Google will automatically switch from driving to walking mode at the best location to exit your vehicle." On the other hand, it also wouldn't be outrageous to assume that if an app is giving you "walking directions" that the route would be walkable for an average user rather than "highly dangerous, even for experienced climbers".
advisedwang 5y ago
It's not just the dotted line that is being criticized. The driving directions end at the physically closest car park, but not the most appropriate for most people.
yibg 5y ago
I can see the confusion but users also should be mindful of the context of using an app. Often times there is no exact location for example so “routes” should be taken as a general guide rather than specific path. If I use google map to navigate to a lake for example, I wouldn’t expect swimming instructions to the middle of the lake. In the photo in the article it looks similar. It’s just navigating to the rough vicinity, instead of an exact location.
- shock-value 5y ago
  > It’s just navigating to the rough vicinity, instead of an exact location. Even that is problematic if they don’t know enough about the route to gauge whether it is viably navigable or hazardous.
eyelidlessness 5y ago
Great that you know that. I didn’t know there were different kinds of dotted lines on Google maps until reading this thread. I bet a lot of other people don’t either. I get dotted lines every time I need to change transportation (walk to/from/between transit). If I saw the screenshot in the article the only clue I’d have that it’s different is the smooth curve, but that’s just because I’ve spent a lot of time looking at maps. I wouldn’t expect people using their phone for directions to know that’s unusual.
OJFord 5y ago
I don't think the article is suggesting people actually literally followed that dotted arc - the mountaineering trust chap's quote is that all the routes from that car park are trepidatious even for experienced people. i.e. their concern is that GMaps users are being directed to that car park, (the highest one, hence closest to 'Ben Nevis' marker) not what the dotted line does or doesn't show from there on. So the solution is to direct them to the (lower-down/further away from destination) visitors' centre car park instead.
- Pyramus 5y ago
  The article is suggesting both. > "And the trust said that a dotted line leading from the car park to the summit could lead walkers into danger."
  - OJFord 5y ago
    Yes but it continues: > Mountaineering groups said the dotted line crossed "potentially fatal" steep, rocky and pathless terrain, while a suggested walking route for a different mountain, An Teallach, would lead people over a cliff. i.e. you can wiggle it all you want, it's what it crosses that's the problem, you'd have to walk around and go up a different face?

stingraycharles 5y ago

While you and I and many a HN reader will understand this, there is something to be said that people will, at some point, mistake this for an actual route and try to follow it.

izacus 5y ago
And that's on them isn't it? Is learning in how to read a map (Google or otherwise) seriously a too hard of an expectation from a person that goes mountain climbing?

monkeybutton 5y ago

Yes! I see this all the time when setting directions for provincial parks and other "remote" destinations. It never occurred to me that someone would blindly follow them.

genewitch 5y ago
I think part of the possible confusion is that "cutesy" curved line from the parking area to the peak. It shouldn't draw anything between where the actual directions end and the map pin, just show the pin. All that being said, changing the directions so it ends up at the visitor center is probably a good choice, regardless of how few people actually were or would be confused.
- samatman 5y ago
  There are better ways to communicate this though. I'd consider a shaded-in area with wiggly outlines, big enough to be path shaped, that just says "walk". That conveys "you need to get yourself to this pin, and we don't know how to help you".
  - shock-value 5y ago
    I disagree. If Google doesn’t know enough about the walking path to even be able to plot it on the map, then they shouldn’t represent to users that there is a navigable path at all.
    - samatman 5y ago
      Yes, but if they know there's a navigable path but they don't know what it is this is a reasonable approach. Obviously, mapping a destination on an island with wiggly lines through the water which say "walk" would not be useful, but wasn't the situation I was envisioning.
happytoexplain 5y ago
It never occurred to you that somebody would "blindly" (what does that mean in this context?) follow a dotted line drawn on Google Maps? That's pretty unreasonable, to put it lightly. Blaming users for the consequences of bad UI is a huge problem in software.
- labster 5y ago
  But I’m also confused that people will blindly follow turn-by-turn road directions too. Even when road signs disagree, even past road closed signs, even on gravel roads right before the first snowfall. People assume the computer knows the map and that the map is the territory. Yes, it’s terrible UI, but people don’t ask themselves if they interpret it wrong. At least you can fix the map; not sure how to fix the blind trust in humans.

minitoar 5y ago

Agreed, this is extremely confusing and a pretty big design flaw. Google Maps pops up a warning if the business you are traveling to is closing soon, or if there are tolls. It should show a warning in these situations where the road ends far from the destination. The heuristics are less obvious, but I think you could catch most cases. You could even prompt to add another section to the trip in walking mode.

toper-centage 5y ago

Most UX design makes lots of assumptions. Someone who is not familiar with Google maps could very well interpret the dotted grey arc as a real path. It's almost identical to the dotted blue path.

burnished 5y ago
How? I really do not see it. Like, I'm glad they are taking feedback and acting on it, but this seems like an overabundance of caution
- eyelidlessness 5y ago
  If they routinely use maps for transit or walk any significant distance from a parking spot, they have a completely different expectation about what the dotted lines mean.
  - andi999 5y ago
    Actually I do think the expectation for the navigation to bring you to the point from where you can actually reach your target is justified. Like when you want to drive to say Disneyland it shd send you to a parking near the entrance not to a parking at the other side from where you cannot enter (but might be closer to the castle).
    - eyelidlessness 5y ago
      Huh

tobr 5y ago

How does it make sense to say “you have to walk the rest of the way” by drawing a line on a map, unless you intended it to imply that that’s the path to walk?

treesprite82 5y ago
Here's what that line looks like currently: https://i.imgur.com/tougs6p.png https://i.imgur.com/tougs6p.png (note: this is with the updated end-point at visitor center, probably won't have gone through loch previously) It's de-emphasised, doesn't show up in directions, is a perfectly smooth curve rather than conforming to paths/roads, and doesn't have the label saying to walk it. I think the vast majority of people would correctly interpret it as just showing the distance between the end-point and the destination set and I don't think it's necessarily bad UI. But still, with the popularity of Google maps and potential danger in misinterpreting it, it's probably worth considering ways to make it even clearer.
- Sniffnoy 5y ago
  In order to look like it's indicating distance, it has to be a straight line, not a curve, and moreover actually have the distance written alongside it. That's at a minimum, I'd say; putting arrowheads on the ends might also help, e.g.
- eyelidlessness 5y ago
  I can only tell it’s de-emphasized because I’ve been told it is. And while I have vision correction it’s reasonably up to date, and I’ve never suspected I have any kind of color blindness until reading this thread.
- oarsinsync 5y ago
  > I think the vast majority of people would correctly interpret it as just showing the distance between the end-point and the destination set and I don't think it's necessarily bad UI. If this thread is anything to go by, slim majority at best. > But still, with the popularity of Google maps and potential danger in misinterpreting it, it's probably worth considering ways to make it even clearer. This is the really important point, and thank you for making it. Google Maps is used by 100 of millions (if not billions) of people. If these issues only impact 1% of users, that's still millions of people negatively impacted. At scale, even "niche" issues matter.

neltnerb 5y ago

This looks to me like an entirely valid hiking route that says to use actual marked foot trails on the ridge. If you have configured it for walking it definitely uses real trails from topographical maps. It wouldn't be outrageous to assume that Google will automatically switch from driving to walking mode at the best location to exit your vehicle. I would personally be double checking if I was confused but Google does do both things so it's easy to imagine Google being smart enough to combine the two now that it obscures so much of the interface. https://www.google.com/maps/dir/43.3518109,-71.7913173/43.3897258,-71.8553154/@43.3564428,-71.8354021,13.5z/data=!4m2!4m1!3e2!5m1!1e4 https://www.google.com/maps/dir/43.3518109,-71.7913173/43.38...

missblit 5y ago
I think there's a couple things here: A dotted blue path indicates a path to walk on. This shows up in public transit or walking directions where part of the trip actually involves walking. A dashed grey arc appears when Google Maps can't actually get you all the way to the destination but can get you close. This arc indicates distance, but not a particular route. This is what the screenshot in the article shows (except the screenshot shows light blue instead of grey for some reason). In particular note how the arc in the screenshot is perfectly smooth instead of following a path, a lighter color than the rest of the route, and dashed instead of dotted.
- Dylan16807 5y ago
  And unless the user is really used to distinguishing between those two, having that with no further explanation is a terrible way to design a UI.
- another-dave 5y ago
  "It wouldn't be outrageous to assume that Google will automatically switch from driving to walking mode at the best location to exit your vehicle." On the other hand, it also wouldn't be outrageous to assume that if an app is giving you "walking directions" that the route would be walkable for an average user rather than "highly dangerous, even for experienced climbers".

advisedwang 5y ago

It's not just the dotted line that is being criticized. The driving directions end at the physically closest car park, but not the most appropriate for most people.

yibg 5y ago

I can see the confusion but users also should be mindful of the context of using an app. Often times there is no exact location for example so “routes” should be taken as a general guide rather than specific path. If I use google map to navigate to a lake for example, I wouldn’t expect swimming instructions to the middle of the lake. In the photo in the article it looks similar. It’s just navigating to the rough vicinity, instead of an exact location.

shock-value 5y ago
> It’s just navigating to the rough vicinity, instead of an exact location. Even that is problematic if they don’t know enough about the route to gauge whether it is viably navigable or hazardous.

eyelidlessness 5y ago

Great that you know that. I didn’t know there were different kinds of dotted lines on Google maps until reading this thread. I bet a lot of other people don’t either. I get dotted lines every time I need to change transportation (walk to/from/between transit). If I saw the screenshot in the article the only clue I’d have that it’s different is the smooth curve, but that’s just because I’ve spent a lot of time looking at maps. I wouldn’t expect people using their phone for directions to know that’s unusual.

OJFord 5y ago

I don't think the article is suggesting people actually literally followed that dotted arc - the mountaineering trust chap's quote is that all the routes from that car park are trepidatious even for experienced people. i.e. their concern is that GMaps users are being directed to that car park, (the highest one, hence closest to 'Ben Nevis' marker) not what the dotted line does or doesn't show from there on. So the solution is to direct them to the (lower-down/further away from destination) visitors' centre car park instead.

Pyramus 5y ago
The article is suggesting both. > "And the trust said that a dotted line leading from the car park to the summit could lead walkers into danger."
- OJFord 5y ago
  Yes but it continues: > Mountaineering groups said the dotted line crossed "potentially fatal" steep, rocky and pathless terrain, while a suggested walking route for a different mountain, An Teallach, would lead people over a cliff. i.e. you can wiggle it all you want, it's what it crosses that's the problem, you'd have to walk around and go up a different face?