I don't like either of those methods of giving directions.
The left,left,right,second-left method suffers from zero error tolerance, which is bad.
But the landmark-based one suffers from the fact that landmarks can be missed at which point there's no failure check at all. "Keep going along the A328 until you get to the Black Dog" can send you halfway across London if you miss the landmark.
I prefer giving directions as a mixture of both combined with error checks ("if you see a big Tesco on your left you've gone too far"). Also, always give someone the simplest route in preference to the shortest. And when giving local directions, encourage the traveller to reacquire directions later ("go down this road to the traffic lights, turn left, walk as far as the park and then ask someone for directions from there").
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2008-03-27 11:24 am (UTC)The left,left,right,second-left method suffers from zero error tolerance, which is bad.
But the landmark-based one suffers from the fact that landmarks can be missed at which point there's no failure check at all. "Keep going along the A328 until you get to the Black Dog" can send you halfway across London if you miss the landmark.
I prefer giving directions as a mixture of both combined with error checks ("if you see a big Tesco on your left you've gone too far"). Also, always give someone the simplest route in preference to the shortest. And when giving local directions, encourage the traveller to reacquire directions later ("go down this road to the traffic lights, turn left, walk as far as the park and then ask someone for directions from there").