Travel Mapping

Highway Data Discussion => In-progress Highway Systems & Work => Topic started by: Jim on May 29, 2017, 10:14:45 pm

Title: canqc: Quebec Provincial Highways
Post by: Jim on May 29, 2017, 10:14:45 pm
The site update running right now will promote canqc to preview status.  Thanks to mapcat for getting the first complete draft together.  I believe it's ready for review.  Even if you do not plan on contributing to a comprehensive review, please report any problems you find as you peruse the routes or add them to your list file.
Title: Re: canqc (Quebec Provincial Highways)
Post by: mapcat on May 29, 2017, 10:59:19 pm
Oscar put in a lot of work too and was very helpful when I had questions. After discussing a things with him, I still have a few questions and would appreciate input from everyone else.

First off, I did not use Ave or Blvd as abbreviations in waypoints because they don't appear on signs that way. When it's abbreviated, Av is used for Avenue ( 1 (https://www.google.com/maps/@46.8542827,-71.2232377,3a,75y,67.2h,93.3t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sK6hD-kXiDrqM3OBcRWxB1g!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) 2 (https://www.google.com/maps/@45.8967492,-73.4318739,3a,15y,30.78h,93.83t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1shjK50tmZkSD2iOMO3RjxVQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) 3 (https://www.google.com/maps/@46.7964294,-71.4158151,3a,48.9y,179.9h,94.13t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1swLTxNUjceYlkygWZv8bAJA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) ) and Boul for Boulevard ( 1 (https://www.google.com/maps/@45.5819401,-73.6728756,3a,75y,331.09h,90.74t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sTkNy1_-AOtOV5GCwp0eJHg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) 2 (https://www.google.com/maps/@45.6319558,-73.6141959,3a,75y,151.11h,87.74t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sXfUOJHwvZ-nCCWnofEtSIQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) ). This is consistent with Canada Post addressing guidelines for French addresses (https://www.canadapost.ca/tools/pg/manual/PGaddress-e.asp?ecid=murl10006450#1441964). Unfortunately, those guidelines don't have an abbreviation for Montée, so I went with Mtée (well, Mtee), which is how it appears on signs ( 1 (https://www.google.com/maps/@45.3384444,-73.1625973,3a,29.4y,226.26h,89.56t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1siMyfHoKNSWpOHqng68rRuQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) 2 (https://www.google.com/maps/@45.1071115,-73.4481192,3a,26.7y,5.28h,90.16t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sGUj1VNojT7VK6FnS6rSTlg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) 3 (https://www.google.com/maps/@46.1747211,-73.094656,3a,15.9y,277.02h,88.7t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s9cPd1bbWe4T_lDAYRIOynA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) ).  Oscar prefers Mon, which I've never been able to find on a sign. Does anyone else have an opinion? If we're ok with these, I'll make the few changes needed for the Autoroute and TCH files so they match the abbreviations in the canqc set.

Also, I didn't draft QC136, even though it's signed from A-73 (https://www.google.com/maps/@46.7501069,-71.2933754,3a,75y,347.11h,90t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sZKWm-GKsMvuYesDeJ_klDA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656), mainly because it's not signed anywhere else, making the opposite end difficult to determine. Anyone see a need for it?

Lastly, I think this (https://www.google.com/maps/@45.4060887,-71.8525778,3a,49.7y,176.77h,83.66t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s02xNUUY0vdXbMiGgXWBc2A!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) is how Québec signs truck routes. Since I'm unsure, I left QC112TrkShe out but can easily add it. That's the only instance I've found so far, but am interested in knowing about others.
Title: Re: canqc (Quebec Provincial Highways)
Post by: mapcat on May 29, 2017, 11:08:54 pm
One other question: what should the A-15 spur to QC117 in St-Jérôme be called? The QC117 waypoint for it is currently "A-15Spur" but we should probably use something else.
Title: Re: canqc (Quebec Provincial Highways)
Post by: Jim on May 29, 2017, 11:24:47 pm
A minor point I noticed is that QC138Mon's point at A-55 is labeled "A-55(181)", but since it's the only place it meets A-55, it can simply be "A-55".
Title: Re: canqc (Quebec Provincial Highways)
Post by: mapcat on May 29, 2017, 11:27:39 pm
A minor point I noticed is that QC138Mon's point at A-55 is labeled "A-55(181)", but since it's the only place it meets A-55, it can simply be "A-55".
Thanks for catching that. Fixed in my file.
Title: Re: canqc (Quebec Provincial Highways)
Post by: oscar on May 30, 2017, 06:05:04 am
First off, I did not use Ave or Blvd as abbreviations in waypoints because they don't appear on signs that way. When it's abbreviated, Av is used for Avenue ( 1 (https://www.google.com/maps/@46.8542827,-71.2232377,3a,75y,67.2h,93.3t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sK6hD-kXiDrqM3OBcRWxB1g!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) 2 (https://www.google.com/maps/@45.8967492,-73.4318739,3a,15y,30.78h,93.83t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1shjK50tmZkSD2iOMO3RjxVQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) 3 (https://www.google.com/maps/@46.7964294,-71.4158151,3a,48.9y,179.9h,94.13t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1swLTxNUjceYlkygWZv8bAJA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) ) and Boul for Boulevard ( 1 (https://www.google.com/maps/@45.5819401,-73.6728756,3a,75y,331.09h,90.74t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sTkNy1_-AOtOV5GCwp0eJHg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) 2 (https://www.google.com/maps/@45.6319558,-73.6141959,3a,75y,151.11h,87.74t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sXfUOJHwvZ-nCCWnofEtSIQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) ). This is consistent with Canada Post addressing guidelines for French addresses (https://www.canadapost.ca/tools/pg/manual/PGaddress-e.asp?ecid=murl10006450#1441964). Unfortunately, those guidelines don't have an abbreviation for Montée, so I went with Mtée (well, Mtee), which is how it appears on signs ( 1 (https://www.google.com/maps/@45.3384444,-73.1625973,3a,29.4y,226.26h,89.56t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1siMyfHoKNSWpOHqng68rRuQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) 2 (https://www.google.com/maps/@45.1071115,-73.4481192,3a,26.7y,5.28h,90.16t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sGUj1VNojT7VK6FnS6rSTlg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) 3 (https://www.google.com/maps/@46.1747211,-73.094656,3a,15.9y,277.02h,88.7t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s9cPd1bbWe4T_lDAYRIOynA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) ).  Oscar prefers Mon, which I've never been able to find on a sign. Does anyone else have an opinion?

If I can briefly explain mine -- my initial reaction to seeing Mtee in a waypoint label was "WTF?", not what you like to see from an abbreviation. Av  and Boul, as well as Prom and Ch, are familiar abbreviations outside QC, in bilingual signage in neighboring provinces. But Montée seems to be a road type unique to Quebec, so you don't recall seeing an abbreviation for that in ON and NB road signs, for example. I suspect Mtee is an unfamiliar and confusing abbreviation outside QC. Even in QC, I don't recall seeing Mtee on its road signs, except in tiny type on some street blades (on the BGSes I've seen so far, it's spelled out without abbreviation). Our default is to abbreviate by truncating to the first three letters (with some exceptions for standard and familiar abbreviations like Blvd or Pkwy), which in this case yields the somewhat more intuitive Mon.

Quote
Also, I didn't draft QC136, even though it's signed from A-73 (https://www.google.com/maps/@46.7501069,-71.2933754,3a,75y,347.11h,90t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sZKWm-GKsMvuYesDeJ_klDA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656), mainly because it's not signed anywhere else, making the opposite end difficult to determine. Anyone see a need for it?

It is signed, even if only at one end. Not as good as typical Quebec signage, but travelers can see the route number somewhere on the route, and people who've seen that route number might wonder if they don't see it in the HB. In some of my jurisdictions, some routes are signed only at one end, and they're included in the HB anyway. So I would add QC 136.
Title: Re: canqc (Quebec Provincial Highways)
Post by: mapcat on May 30, 2017, 08:55:48 am
It is signed, even if only at one end. Not as good as typical Quebec signage, but travelers can see the route number somewhere on the route, and people who've seen that route number might wonder if they don't see it in the HB. In some of my jurisdictions, some routes are signed only at one end, and they're included in the HB anyway. So I would add QC 136.

OK, where do I put the eastern end? The Boul Champlain route seems to be accepted by all sources, but the government doesn't specify what happens to it past the ferry. OSM and Google wrap it around Vieux-Québec, but disagree past that. Bing maps don't show the route at all.
Title: Re: canqc (Quebec Provincial Highways)
Post by: 7/8 on May 30, 2017, 09:00:39 am
I personally think Mon is easier to understand than Mtee, though I think both are reasonable.

I just wanted to say thank you to mapcat and oscar for working on this, since this was one of the few systems I was really looking forward to! I was worried this one wouldn't be done for another year or so, but this news just made my day :)
Title: Re: canqc (Quebec Provincial Highways)
Post by: yakra on May 30, 2017, 11:28:17 am
Also, I didn't draft QC136, even though it's signed from A-73 (https://www.google.com/maps/@46.7501069,-71.2933754,3a,75y,347.11h,90t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sZKWm-GKsMvuYesDeJ_klDA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656), mainly because it's not signed anywhere else, making the opposite end difficult to determine. Anyone see a need for it?
According to the GeoBase 7.0 shapefiles, Rue Notre-Dame (http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=46.812155&lon=-71.202815).
I haven't checked any other sources.
Title: Re: canqc (Quebec Provincial Highways)
Post by: mapcat on May 30, 2017, 07:17:43 pm
According to the GeoBase 7.0 shapefiles, Rue Notre-Dame (http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=46.812155&lon=-71.202815).
I haven't checked any other sources.
That source is enough. Thanks. It's in.
Title: Re: canqc (Quebec Provincial Highways)
Post by: oscar on May 30, 2017, 08:23:26 pm
To follow up on my earlier post on abbreviations: I drove today, in addition to part of A-40 yesterday, substantial parts of A-30, A-10, A-55, A-73, and A-20. Several of the BGSes, and smaller signs on overpasses, said Montee _____. None abbreviated that as Mtee, only one might've used Mon (not sure whether that was an abbreviation for Montee, or something else entirely). The signs along those Autoroutes used familiar abbreviations like Av, Boul, Ch, and Prom. But no abbrevs for Montee.
Title: Re: canqc (Quebec Provincial Highways)
Post by: mapcat on May 30, 2017, 10:00:59 pm
That isn't a strong argument for using "Mon" over any other abbreviation. Yes, like they do for Avenue and Chemin, they write out Montée on signs (most street blades, too). No surprises there. But we have to abbreviate. Which is why I went with the abbreviation preferred by the people who make the signs, and seen by people who use the signs. If you see a sign that says Mon, please take a picture.
Title: Re: canqc (Quebec Provincial Highways)
Post by: Jim on May 30, 2017, 10:02:52 pm
For QC138Mon, I think the visible point BoulStMau_W might be a candidate to be replaced with one at Boul. des Chenaux, which is accessible from A-40 (and which is what I took on my short loop through Trois-Rivieres a few years back).
Title: Re: canqc (Quebec Provincial Highways)
Post by: mapcat on May 30, 2017, 10:07:40 pm
For QC138Mon, I think the visible point BoulStMau_W might be a candidate to be replaced with one at Boul. des Chenaux, which is accessible from A-40 (and which is what I took on my short loop through Trois-Rivieres a few years back).
No reason we can't have both points. It's added.
Title: Re: canqc (Quebec Provincial Highways)
Post by: oscar on May 30, 2017, 10:29:43 pm
That isn't a strong argument for using "Mon" over any other abbreviation. Yes, like they do for Avenue and Chemin, they write out Montée on signs (most street blades, too). No surprises there. But we have to abbreviate. Which is why I went with the abbreviation preferred by the people who make the signs, and seen by people who use the signs. If you see a sign that says Mon, please take a picture.

As I see it, Transports Quebec seems not to have an established abbreviation, else I would've seen it on the Autoroutes I drove. The street blades seem to be a local matter, as you say there is no consistently-used abbreviation, and are hard for travelers to read at highway speeds (thus my focus on the more visible signage on the Autoroutes). The lack of a province-level official abbreviation for Montee, ISTM, leaves us free to go with the shorter and more intuitive default abbreviation Mon.

I'll be leaving Quebec tomorrow morning to get to my next stop in NB, so will not be in a position to look at street blades on my way out.

EDIT: Only one other instance of Montee spotted, no abbreviation.

It occurred to me that maybe the reason neither Transport Canada nor (as mentioned above) Canada Post don't have abbreviations for Montee, but do for other road types, is that they couldn't come up with a good abbrev and/or neither mtee nor any other abbreviation out there was widely accepted enough or understood well enough by the general public. Normally, we abbreviate words longer than four letters by truncating to the first three letters, unless there is a widely known and well-accepted alternative like Hwy or Pkwy. (For example, when did the Hawaii routes, I was told to abbreviate Wharf as "Wha", even though probably nobody uses else that abbreviation.) There may be no such alternative abbreviation of Montee, and unless there is something wrong with the default abbrev Mon, we might as well go with that.
Title: Re: canqc (Quebec Provincial Highways)
Post by: 7/8 on May 31, 2017, 09:01:12 pm
I just noticed that QC 241 is missing.
Title: Re: canqc (Quebec Provincial Highways)
Post by: mapcat on June 01, 2017, 02:49:25 am
I just noticed that QC 241 is missing.
Thanks, it was left out of the csvs for some reason. In the next update.
Title: Re: canqc (Quebec Provincial Highways)
Post by: Duke87 on June 01, 2017, 08:13:54 pm
I'm fine with using "Mon" for Montée. It may not be standard but it is the first three letters so it's easily decipherable. When I drafted islth I used the first thee letters for each type of road suffix in Icelandic, there are as far as I can tell no standard abbreviations for those either.

I support using the standard French abbreviations for others (e.g. "Boul" instead of "Blvd").

Couple route specific notes:
- For QC138Mon, what is with the kink in the route around point BoulAng? It appears to me you may have captured a temporary detour route around construction in the area. To properly catch the permanent route you will want to delete the three points between A-20(64) and RueStJac_W.
- For QC136, my understanding is the western end is at QC 175, not A-73 (it is signed from QC 175) (https://www.google.com/maps/@46.7516163,-71.2914726,3a,45y,346.71h,105.02t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1szIqQL-INjsMrkO5JQtszRg!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo3.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DzIqQL-INjsMrkO5JQtszRg%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D59.20686%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i13312!8i6656). This road was a subject of discussion at the 2014 Quebec City meet, and Carl had pointed out where the technically correct endpoints are. Let me ping him about it.

Title: Re: canqc (Quebec Provincial Highways)
Post by: mapcat on June 01, 2017, 09:48:52 pm
Couple route specific notes:
- For QC138Mon, what is with the kink in the route around point BoulAng? It appears to me you may have captured a temporary detour route around construction in the area. To properly catch the permanent route you will want to delete the three points between A-20(64) and RueStJac_W.
Is the reconstruction completed there? It appears some bridges will need to be rebuilt, and 138 will either follow A-20 or is being removed from it. If you have a link to construction status I'd appreciate a look.

Quote
- For QC136, my understanding is the western end is at QC 175, not A-73 (it is signed from QC 175) (https://www.google.com/maps/@46.7516163,-71.2914726,3a,45y,346.71h,105.02t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1szIqQL-INjsMrkO5JQtszRg!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo3.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DzIqQL-INjsMrkO5JQtszRg%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D59.20686%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i13312!8i6656). This road was a subject of discussion at the 2014 Quebec City meet, and Carl had pointed out where the technically correct endpoints are. Let me ping him about it.
I saw that it was signed from QC 175, but the Geobase files show the route beginning directly beneath A-73. That source treats the roadway to/from Av des Hôtels as a set of ramps, and the avenue itself as an unnumbered street.
Title: Re: canqc (Quebec Provincial Highways)
Post by: oscar on June 06, 2017, 08:33:56 pm
A minor point I noticed is that QC138Mon's point at A-55 is labeled "A-55(181)", but since it's the only place it meets A-55, it can simply be "A-55".

Similarly, QC202's A-15(6) => A-15.

I'm just starting on reconstructing my QC travels, so I might find some others as I go along.
Title: Re: canqc (Quebec Provincial Highways)
Post by: Duke87 on June 06, 2017, 10:18:27 pm
Is the reconstruction completed there? It appears some bridges will need to be rebuilt, and 138 will either follow A-20 or is being removed from it. If you have a link to construction status I'd appreciate a look.

Apparently the route as I know it is closed until 2019(!). (http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/turcot-interchange-ramp-closed-1.3361996) Okay, wow, that's a detour lasting four years. The planned final arrangement is visible in the document: https://www.turcot.transports.gouv.qc.ca/fr/Documents/2016-04-15_Turcot%205-1.1.pdf

Similar to the old setup, but slightly tweaked. I would map the old route and be prepared to relocate the point for A-20(64) once the construction is complete. What you've got mapped may be the de facto route currently and for a couple more years to come, but it's a temporary detour nonetheless.

Quote
I saw that it was signed from QC 175, but the Geobase files show the route beginning directly beneath A-73. That source treats the roadway to/from Av des Hôtels as a set of ramps, and the avenue itself as an unnumbered street.

Carl pointed me to the Geobase files you reference, so I agree - what you have mapped is correct.
Title: Re: canqc (Quebec Provincial Highways)
Post by: oscar on June 07, 2017, 09:45:18 am
On QC 366, a fairly optional point request, for the intersection with Ch. de Wakefield Heights, on the east side of Riviere Gatineau. Some of us on a 2012 road meet went to the east portal of a covered bridge carrying the Trans-Canada Trail across the river, and I'm pretty sure we took QC 366 to Ch. de Wakefield Heights to get there.
Title: Re: canqc (Quebec Provincial Highways)
Post by: mapcat on June 07, 2017, 10:35:33 pm

Apparently the route as I know it is closed until 2019(!). (http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/turcot-interchange-ramp-closed-1.3361996) Okay, wow, that's a detour lasting four years. The planned final arrangement is visible in the document: https://www.turcot.transports.gouv.qc.ca/fr/Documents/2016-04-15_Turcot%205-1.1.pdf (https://www.turcot.transports.gouv.qc.ca/fr/Documents/2016-04-15_Turcot%205-1.1.pdf)

Similar to the old setup, but slightly tweaked. I would map the old route and be prepared to relocate the point for A-20(64) once the construction is complete. What you've got mapped may be the de facto route currently and for a couple more years to come, but it's a temporary detour nonetheless.

Well, since the old route is currently unclinchable, and will differ from the future route, I'm more inclined to split it at the construction zone. Thoughts, anyone?

Similarly, QC202's A-15(6) => A-15.

Thanks. Fixed.

On QC 366, a fairly optional point request, for the intersection with Ch. de Wakefield Heights, on the east side of Riviere Gatineau. Some of us on a 2012 road meet went to the east portal of a covered bridge carrying the Trans-Canada Trail across the river, and I'm pretty sure we took QC 366 to Ch. de Wakefield Heights to get there.

Lots of people could probably use that then. Added.
Title: Re: canqc (Quebec Provincial Highways)
Post by: Duke87 on June 07, 2017, 11:29:20 pm
Well, since the old route is currently unclinchable, and will differ from the future route, I'm more inclined to split it at the construction zone. Thoughts, anyone?

That seems needlessly messy and... AFAIK would also lack precedent. Temporary bridge closures (effectively what this is) happen all the time. We don't go splitting the route in the system or remapping it along the posted detour when they do. We leave it as is.

Look at it this way: if QC 138 had been mapped and in an active system before the ramps to A-20 closed for construction, would their closure have been deemed cause for changing the route? The fact that we happened not to map the route until after the construction started should not logically make a difference in how we handle it.
Title: Re: canqc (Quebec Provincial Highways)
Post by: oscar on June 08, 2017, 12:02:21 am
Well, since the old route is currently unclinchable, and will differ from the future route, I'm more inclined to split it at the construction zone. Thoughts, anyone?

That seems needlessly messy and... AFAIK would also lack precedent. Temporary bridge closures (effectively what this is) happen all the time. We don't go splitting the route in the system or remapping it along the posted detour when they do. We leave it as is.

Agreed, but not totally unprecedented. IN 912, in CHM days when it was in Select Numbered State Freeways rather than in the Indiana state set as it is now, was split in two when a long bridge in the middle of the route was torn down, with no immediate plans to replace it. Of course, folks who'd clinched the route before the bridge demolition were  done out of some mileage. And, AIUI, there are now plans to build a new bridge reconnecting the two IN 912 segments.

Permanent or long-term closures or detours are one thing, especially if there are no plans to restore the old route. But something that'll be fixed (hopefully) in just two years should be ignored.
Title: Re: canqc (Quebec Provincial Highways)
Post by: rickmastfan67 on June 11, 2017, 08:30:10 am
QC-117 (& QC TCH (Kirkland Lake)):
ChKan - Would recommend removal of this point (seems to be just a gravel road with no name signed in the field) and replace it with a point just to the East @ Chemin du Mont-Kanasuta, which is a paved road and has a street blade showing it's name (per StreetView).
QC/ON - Needs to be synced with it's Ontario counterpart, ON-66 & ON TCH (Kirkland Lake).  Doing this will clear a NMP error.


QC-101:
Multiplex with QC-117 is completely broken and needs to be fixed (only the 'RuePri' point is showing up as synced right now per the HB).  Sync it with 117's locations for the multiplex, or QC TCH (Kirkland Lake) would need to be updated as well.
Title: Re: canqc (Quebec Provincial Highways)
Post by: oscar on June 11, 2017, 09:59:30 am
QC-117 (& QC TCH (Kirkland Lake)):
ChKan - Would recommend removal of this point (seems to be just a gravel road with no name signed in the field) and replace it with a point just to the East @ Chemin du Mont-Kanasuta, which is a paved road and has a street blade showing it's name (per StreetView).
QC/ON - Needs to be synced with it's Ontario counterpart, ON-66 & ON TCH (Kirkland Lake).  Doing this will clear a NMP error.

Agreed. I've made these changes locally (which should go live later today) to QC TCHKir, and if OK with mapcat I can make identical changes to QC117. The new ChMontKan point also replaces a shaping point to the east.
Title: Re: canqc (Quebec Provincial Highways)
Post by: mapcat on June 11, 2017, 11:17:41 am
Agreed. I've made these changes locally (which should go live later today) to QC TCHKir, and if OK with mapcat I can make identical changes to QC117. The new ChMontKan point also replaces a shaping point to the east.
Oscar, I told you I was going to work on this today. We can't both edit the same files and submit changes without causing problems. You remember what happened last time. Please don't submit your pull request. Thank you.
Title: Re: canqc (Quebec Provincial Highways)
Post by: oscar on June 11, 2017, 11:49:30 am
Agreed. I've made these changes locally (which should go live later today) to QC TCHKir, and if OK with mapcat I can make identical changes to QC117. The new ChMontKan point also replaces a shaping point to the east.
Oscar, I told you I was going to work on this today. We can't both edit the same files and submit changes without causing problems. You remember what happened last time. Please don't submit your pull request. Thank you.

I'm confused. You said you were going to work on synching QC 101 to TCHKir/QC 117, which you can do with changes only to QC 101. The changes rickmastfan suggested (and I would implement) to TCHKir are all west of the QC 101 concurrency, and so wouldn't affect your changes to QC 101. That part of TCHKir also isn't concurrent with any other canqc route, other than QC 117 (most of which is a clone of TCHKir).

The pull request for QC TCHKir isn't yet in the system, only in my local files. I was going to include that later today with some usaca updates that I'm still working on.

As I said before, I can make the QC TCHKir changes to QC 117 if you want, or you can make them yourself once the TCHKir changes are in the master. (especially if you're editing the south end of QC 117, which isn't concurrent with TCHKir). Up to you.
Title: Re: canqc (Quebec Provincial Highways)
Post by: mapcat on June 11, 2017, 01:34:39 pm
I'm confused. You said you were going to work on synching QC 101 to TCHKir/QC 117, which you can do with changes only to QC 101. The changes rickmastfan suggested (and I would implement) to TCHKir are all west of the QC 101 concurrency, and so wouldn't affect your changes to QC 101. That part of TCHKir also isn't concurrent with any other canqc route, other than QC 117 (most of which is a clone of TCHKir).

The pull request for QC TCHKir isn't yet in the system, only in my local files. I was going to include that later today with some usaca updates that I'm still working on.

As I said before, I can make the QC TCHKir changes to QC 117 if you want, or you can make them yourself once the TCHKir changes are in the master. (especially if you're editing the south end of QC 117, which isn't concurrent with TCHKir). Up to you.

I'm referring to this message:

Quote from: June 8PM from mapcat
I am aware of these errors and more and plan to take care of all of them after I get home this weekend.

I should have clarified "and more" (I was busy at the time): there are almost 200 NMP errors in Québec currently, and I was planning on taking care of all of them. Some include changes to Autoroutes, so you will want to update your fork after the merge. I've incorporated the edits James suggested, and have dealt with the most obvious NMP errors. Some of those will remain after this update, so I will most likely need to complete this tomorrow.

Pull request submitted: https://github.com/TravelMapping/HighwayData/pull/1340 (https://github.com/TravelMapping/HighwayData/pull/1340)
Title: Re: canqc (Quebec Provincial Highways)
Post by: oscar on June 11, 2017, 01:40:11 pm
Thanx for the clarification. I had no other QC changes in the pipeline. I've glorked my local changes to QC TCHKir, so my next pull request will be just usaca (and maybe also a few outstanding usahi NMPs).
Title: Re: canqc (Quebec Provincial Highways)
Post by: mapcat on June 11, 2017, 06:28:35 pm
Thanx for the clarification. I had no other QC changes in the pipeline. I've glorked my local changes to QC TCHKir, so my next pull request will be just usaca (and maybe also a few outstanding usahi NMPs).
Great. There are 30 left for me to fix or mark FP, so I will do that later tonight or tomorrow. All the datacheck errors that are left are visible distance or false positives, so I'll wait on marking those FP until after the peer review is done.

Edit: I believe that all NMPs that should be fixed are in https://github.com/TravelMapping/HighwayData/pull/1343 (https://github.com/TravelMapping/HighwayData/pull/1343)

I will check the remaining NMPs after this is pulled in and add the FPs to the list.
Title: Re: canqc (Quebec Provincial Highways)
Post by: bhemphill on September 23, 2017, 02:34:16 pm
QC170 has a slightly different routing around waypoint 25.  I think what Mapnik shows is the current configuration of the interchange with A-70.
Title: Re: canqc (Quebec Provincial Highways)
Post by: mapcat on September 23, 2017, 04:19:45 pm
Thanks--good to know OSM has been updated. My updates are in https://github.com/TravelMapping/HighwayData/pull/1620 (https://github.com/TravelMapping/HighwayData/pull/1620) and Oscar might want to check where I placed the eastern intersection with A-70, in case he'd like A-70 to use the same point.

@bhemphill: did you happen to notice if A-70's new interchange with QC170 has an exit number?
Title: Re: canqc (Quebec Provincial Highways)
Post by: oscar on September 23, 2017, 05:03:43 pm
Thanks--good to know OSM has been updated. My updates are in https://github.com/TravelMapping/HighwayData/pull/1620 (https://github.com/TravelMapping/HighwayData/pull/1620) and Oscar might want to check where I placed the eastern intersection with A-70, in case he'd like A-70 to use the same point.

@bhemphill: did you happen to notice if A-70's new interchange with QC170 has an exit number?

I'm curious about the Ch. de la Grande-Anse interchange number, too. But especially if there's no number, I can replace the ChGraAnse point (not in use, unless bhemphill is going to use it) with QC170_E at QC170's A-70_E location. The old location might be better, except for the weird way QC170 now weaves through the Grande-Anse interchange.

I suggest the QC 170 route file be tweaked, to replace the former A-70 waypoint with where the closed connector to A-70 peeled away from the new QC 170 alignment (a point needed for my own list file, and perhaps another user's):

*ToA-70 +A-70 http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=48.370926&lon=-71.066254
[EDIT: corrected coordinates]

I'll make the corresponding change to A-70, to change *QC170 to *ToQC170 +QC170 (QC170 is in use, by me and someone else).

I had considered a side trip up there on my way back from California, since the A-70 extension might be the last addition to the Autoroute system for a few years. But I ran out of time to get back home for my scheduled eye surgery. My recovery from that is proceeding normally, but it might not be complete before winter sets in up there; maybe next spring?
Title: Re: canqc (Quebec Provincial Highways)
Post by: mapcat on September 23, 2017, 08:20:05 pm
I suggest the QC 170 route file be tweaked, to replace the former A-70 waypoint with where the closed connector to A-70 peeled away from the new QC 170 alignment (a point needed for my own list file, and perhaps another user's):

*ToA-70 +A-70 http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=48.370926&lon=-71.066254
If you mean moving the old A-70 point to the short road that accesses A-70 at Sortie 50, that's in the pull (I renamed it A-70(50)). If you mean doing that, plus adding another point ~400m away at the location where A-70 used to join QC170, I didn't think that was far enough away from the new point to matter.

I added points at the ends of the former routing of QC170 along Chemin Saint-Anicet as well.

Also, it was my understanding that alt labels aren't necessary with preview systems, so I didn't retain the names for those I changed here.
Title: Re: canqc (Quebec Provincial Highways)
Post by: oscar on September 23, 2017, 09:17:12 pm
I suggest the QC 170 route file be tweaked, to replace the former A-70 waypoint with where the closed connector to A-70 peeled away from the new QC 170 alignment (a point needed for my own list file, and perhaps another user's):

*ToA-70 +A-70 http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=48.370926&lon=-71.066254
If you mean moving the old A-70 point to the short road that accesses A-70 at Sortie 50, that's in the pull (I renamed it A-70(50)). If you mean doing that, plus adding another point ~400m away at the location where A-70 used to join QC170, I didn't think that was far enough away from the new point to matter.

...

Also, it was my understanding that alt labels aren't necessary with preview systems, so I didn't retain the names for those I changed here.

My suggestion was indeed to include both my proposed *ToA-70 point and your A-70(50) point (which I saw in your pull request). I think 400m is not too small a distance. My requested point would also pair up with the *QC170 point (to be renamed *ToQC170 +QC170) already in the A-70 route file, which is more necessary for that file and also half a mile away from its waypoint 50.

Alt labels in preview systems are purely optional. I usually omit them in my own systems, except when a change is made a day or two before activation. I'll just edit my list file to adjust to what you do with the QC170 route file, and other users can do likewise.
Title: Re: canqc (Quebec Provincial Highways)
Post by: bhemphill on September 25, 2017, 09:42:17 am
I was westbound on QC170, so there was just the sign saying go straight to stay on QC170 and veer right to get on A70.  There were still construction cones up keeping it to one lane of use and no access to the exit, I think, but I don't remember for sure although I do remember seeing the town name but not exactly which sign(s) it was on since I do remember thinking about the song.  So my best guess of memory is that the exit wasn't open yet with a number, although I didn't pay real close attention to that detail.  I was also getting hungry and had been stopped by a train just a couple miles to the east of there, so keeping moving for traffic behind me and finding food were more on my mind as well as being a little distracted by the orange stuff.  I guess I need to get a dashcam   :D.  I didn't go back to explore and investigate after I ate since the construction signs indicated that QC170 was closed to through traffic somewhere east of QC175.  The construction on QC138 had added a lot of time to the trip that ended up cutting out some of my exploring and road clinching plans for that whole area.  Quebec 511 indicates that the construction cones in that eastern QC170 A-70 interchange area are still going to be up for 3 weeks yet.

I am looking to use that easternmost point, whatever name it has.  If I have to change the point name in my file later on, that is okay.  I know it will be a number at some point when the road is extended east for sure.
Title: Re: canqc (Quebec Provincial Highways)
Post by: oscar on October 29, 2017, 08:09:09 pm
I traveled A-70 and other routes in the Saguenay region last week. There is no exit number at its east end, and no need to change anything else with A-70 or QC 170. Figures, since A-70 ends at a roundabout, and Transports Quebec seems not to assign exit numbers to roundabouts.

Three other notes about the routes in the Saguenay region: 

QC 172's km-markers run from east to west for some reason, while the roughly parallel QC 170 has its km-markers running from west to east. Both routes are signed as west-east routes. The QC 172 route file has its waypoints in west to east order. Maybe flip the waypoint order for QC 172?

Also, looking at the QC 138 ferry crossing between Baie-Sainte-Catherine and Tadoussac, I noticed that the waypoint for the ferry terminal in Baie Sainte-Catherine is labeled BSteCatFry, while on the other side it's TadFry. Should those points be labeled for the ferries' destinations, rather than where they leave from, e.g. BSteCatFry => TadFry? FWIW, in BC the terminals for the ferry route connecting the two TCH 1 segments are labeled HorBayFry in Nanaimo, and NanFry in Horseshoe Bay; similar for the ferry link for TCH 16. Or both of the ones on QC 138 could be labeled Fry, especially since (unlike the BC ferries) the two vessels operating from the Baie-Sainte-Catherine and Tadoussac ferry terminals don't go to any other destinations.

The QC 381 file looks right. But it is a challenging mountain road (named "Route des Montagnes"), especially with the steep grades up to 18% near its southern end. I traveled the route heading southbound, so I drove those grades going downhill in low gear. I'm not real sure my elderly Prius could've handled those grades going uphill, though I did see 18-wheelers heading north on QC 381.
Title: Re: canqc (Quebec Provincial Highways)
Post by: yakra on December 16, 2017, 04:10:40 am
Quote from: canqc.csv
canqc;QC;QC138;;;;qc.qc138;
canqc;QC;QC138;;Mon;Montréal;qc.qc138mon;
lines' order is reversed

QC138Mon:
BSteCatFry doesbn't meet label conventions. "Baie Ste Catherine Ferry" becomes...
Quote from: manual_wayptlabels.php
If the cross road name has more than 3 words, use one of two options:
1. Pick out the two most important words besides the road type and use only those: Martin Luther King Boulevard becomes MarKingBlvd. Three words in total are included in shortened form.
BaieSteFry, BaieCatFry, SteCatFry,

Quote from: manual_wayptlabels.php
2. Pick out one important word besides the road type and use it and the initials of the other words: Martin Luther King Boulevard becomes MLKingBlvd. Two words in total are included in shortened form along with initials of the rest.
BaieSCFry, BSteCFry, or BSCatFry.

...or does it?
If I search http://cmap.m-plex.com/tools/manual_wayptlabels.php for the string "ferry", I find nothing. But ISTR a "use the ferry name" convention developing prior to the end of CHM (https://github.com/TravelMapping/HighwayData/blob/master/chm_final/cantch/pe.tchpei.wpt). Which you did?
On the one hand, I see "Tadoussac-Baie-Sainte-Catherine" as the ferry name in OSM. If the ferry name is the same at both ends, we may want to go with that (and thus in main qc.qc138 too); I like TadBSCFry the best out of the available options. FWIW, the only parallel in my work I can think of is in cannsc; the labels for ferry names (which probably (http://web.archive.org/web/20100205051344/http://the506.com/roads/NS/211.html) came (http://web.archive.org/web/20120224060812/http://www.the506.com/roads/NS/217.html) from (http://web.archive.org/web/20100205051009/http://the506.com/roads/NS/223.html) here (http://web.archive.org/web/20100205073407/http://the506.com/roads/NS/312.html)) are the same in the routes on each end.
On the other hand, the ferry could go by a different name at its two ends, and that's totally legit.
I'd be interested to hear what experience other contributors have had in naming ferry waypoints.

QC138:
TadFry: see above.
shapefiles have the E end here (http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=50.194242&lon=-61.267202).

QC138Tet:
shapefiles have the W end here (http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=50.674036&lon=-59.382440).
TeteBalArpt -> TeteBalAir

QC138Tab:
W end: Chemin de la Baie-du-Bateau being concurrent, "End" is more appropriate.
shapefiles have the E end here (http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=50.837549&lon=-58.977191), where PAVSTATUS changes from Paved to Unpaved.

Title: Re: canqc (Quebec Provincial Highways)
Post by: yakra on June 28, 2018, 02:23:28 pm
The QC337@RangSteHen point is missing from QC335.
Title: Re: canqc (Quebec Provincial Highways)
Post by: mapcat on June 28, 2018, 02:55:06 pm
Thanks. Fixed in my copy.
Title: Re: canqc (Quebec Provincial Highways)
Post by: froggie on July 13, 2019, 09:16:27 pm
Jumping in on this thread since it's still a preview system:

QC243:  Shouldn't the QC112_N point be QC112_W?
Title: Re: canqc (Quebec Provincial Highways)
Post by: mapcat on July 14, 2019, 10:22:14 am
@oscar: Are you handing this set now? I haven't done anything with it in months nor do I intend to. If you can't/don't want to deal with this let me know and I will get it.
Title: Re: canqc (Quebec Provincial Highways)
Post by: oscar on July 14, 2019, 09:57:51 pm
I thought canqc was still in your hands, at least until it goes active.

I have to make some changes to A-10, A-15, and A-20 for the new Champlain Bridge, which will also affect QC 134 which is concurrent with Autoroutes on the interchange with the south end of the bridge. I can take care of QC 134, and QC 243, while I'm at it.

AIUI, the conversion of A-720 to QC 136 (Montreal) is still in progress.
Title: Re: canqc (Quebec Provincial Highways)
Post by: mapcat on July 14, 2019, 10:57:40 pm
Please take it if you've got time. You're obviously paying a lot more attention to what's going on up there than I am.

It's not going active until someone does a peer review, and no one has indicated any interest in that in 2 years.
Title: Re: canqc (Quebec Provincial Highways)
Post by: froggie on July 16, 2019, 09:56:18 am
Regarding QC 136, English translations of Turcot Interchange construction info suggest A-720 won't officially become part of QC 136 until the Turcot Interchange construction is completed.  So probably a couple more years.

And speaking of QC 136, there's a question on the AARoads forum as to where the "eastern end of QC 136" in Quebec City is.  The following is directly quoted from them:

Quote
I traveled the tunnel with the reversible lane that some sources (Google Maps, Quebec 511) say are part of QC 136, not not others (Apple Maps, OpenStreetMap, Travel Mapping).
Title: Re: canqc (Quebec Provincial Highways)
Post by: vdeane on July 19, 2019, 07:51:05 pm
As per my post on AARoads:
Quote
The Québec Atlas des transports (http://transports.atlas.gouv.qc.ca/Infrastructures/InfraClassesRoutes.asp) shows QC 136 as ending at the same place as shown in TravelMapping.  The rest is reference route 42330.
Title: Re: canqc (Quebec Provincial Highways)
Post by: si404 on August 30, 2019, 06:28:30 am
It's not going active until someone does a peer review, and no one has indicated any interest in that in 2 years.
I can do it
Title: Re: canqc (Quebec Provincial Highways)
Post by: si404 on September 05, 2019, 10:42:03 am
QC101
 - border marked on OSM is the other side of the island to the point. Is OSM wrong, or does the border point need moving (also ON63)?
 - Ch7eRang for Chemin des 7e-et-8e-Rangs isn't quite right: Ch7eRan?
 - shaping point north of QC117_W not on the highway as depicted on OSM (also QC117 and TCHKir)
 - RuePri_N and RuePri perhaps need some thinking about suffixes
 - QC117_E -> BlvdRid_E (or whatever the abbrev for Boulevard is in QC) due to new bypass rerouting QC117
 - RueSag -> RueSag_S
 - ChGolf ought to be in the middle of the roundabout (and renamed QC117_E)
 - add point at Ave1e (leads to QC111 point Rang2e)

QC104
 - should QC217 be merged with A-30 (one-point per interchange)?
 - RuePri_E -> RuePri

QC105
 - ChLacSteM -> ChLSM? ChLacSMar?
 - ChMar is slightly off where OSM has the intersection
 - ChPtCom is slightly off where OSM has the intersection (and the road is called Chemin du Calumet on OSM)


QC107
 - would ChBancGris be better replaced by a point at ChRie?


QC108
 - additional point at Rue Main in North Hatley as important and leads to QC143 at ChShe
 - add point at Chemin Glenday in preparation for A-410 construction opening?
 - RangFon -> ChFon?

QC109
 - ChLacCel is off both highway and intersection according to OSM
 - is Aur worth keeping?
 - Aur and DJP source for names?
Title: Re: canqc (Quebec Provincial Highways)
Post by: oscar on September 05, 2019, 11:45:41 am
QC101
 - border marked on OSM is the other side of the island to the point. Is OSM wrong, or does the border point need moving (also ON63)?

EDIT: @rickmastfan67, is the ON63 border point based on MTO shapefiles? Some other online maps that show the border, place it where we have it in the QC101 and ON63 route files. OTOH, Atlas des Transports (http://transports.atlas.gouv.qc.ca/Infrastructures/InfraClassesRoutes.asp) (Transport Quebec's online map of its highways, which vdeane and I have been using lately to nail down Autoroute endpoints) seems to place the QC 101 endpoint at the border as shown in OSM. GMSV also indicates that Ontario route and other signage begins just west of the border shown by OSM. Both indicate that ON 63's endpoint should be moved as si404 suggests, along with QC 101's.

Quote
- QC117_E -> BlvdRid_E (or whatever the abbrev for Boulevard is in QC) due to new bypass rerouting QC117

For both canqc and canqca, we've been changing Blvd to Boul wherever we come across it.

Atlas des Transports seems to disagree with OSM on whether QC 117 has been rerouted in Rouyn-Noranda (which would also affect the TCH). It puts a QC 117 marker on the supposed new alignment, but a popup when you click on the roadway identifies it as a local road, while the 117 alignment we have in the HB is classified as "nationale" along with the rest of QC 117. (In Quebec, when something is called "nationale", the nation in question usually is Quebec rather than Canada.) Also, GMSV May 2018 imagery shows QC 117 peeling away from QC 101 at the Ch. Bradley/Boul. Rideau intersection, where we have it. Absent stronger evidence that a more recent reroute has occurred, I will leave QC 117 alone (and also not go back anytime soon to field-check/reclinch that part of the TCH -- not with two known impending TCH de-clinches in SK and PEI for me to deal with).

I'll follow up on other comments later.
Title: Re: canqc (Quebec Provincial Highways)
Post by: mapcat on September 05, 2019, 01:49:20 pm
@mapcat and @rickmastfan67, is the border point based on MTO and/or Transports Quebec shapefiles? Some other online maps that show the border, place it where we have it in the QC101 and ON63 route files.
I don't recall investigating it when I drafted the file and likely just went with the point from ON 63.
Title: Re: canqc (Quebec Provincial Highways)
Post by: rickmastfan67 on September 05, 2019, 07:38:32 pm
QC101
 - border marked on OSM is the other side of the island to the point. Is OSM wrong, or does the border point need moving (also ON63)?

EDIT: @rickmastfan67, is the ON63 border point based on MTO shapefiles? Some other online maps that show the border, place it where we have it in the QC101 and ON63 route files. OTOH, Atlas des Transports (http://transports.atlas.gouv.qc.ca/Infrastructures/InfraClassesRoutes.asp) (Transport Quebec's online map of its highways, which vdeane and I have been using lately to nail down Autoroute endpoints) seems to place the QC 101 endpoint at the border as shown in OSM. GMSV also indicates that Ontario route and other signage begins just west of the border shown by OSM. Both indicate that ON 63's endpoint should be moved as si404 suggests, along with QC 101's.

If I remember correctly, it was based on what Google had back then when Ontario was originally drafted.

Also, some maps show something weird.  Take a look at the "Esri WorldTopoMap" layer in the HB.  Shows the OSM border, but shows QC-101 shields on the island. :o  Yet the "Esri WorldStreetMap" layer from the same people, show the border on the other side of the island. The "Here" maps also show it where we currently have it.   Aye-yi-yi-yi-yi!

But since I've found the 'END ON-63' (https://goo.gl/maps/SNtLjXxK1irUxqPQ8) shield on the island, I can get behind the OSM boarder location.  Mapcat, pick a place you want the boarder to be, post it here, and I'll update my copy of ON-63 with it after making tweaks for the island addition.
Title: Re: canqc (Quebec Provincial Highways)
Post by: oscar on September 06, 2019, 02:47:09 pm
Mapcat, pick a place you want the boarder to be, post it here, and I'll update my copy of ON-63 with it after making tweaks for the island addition.

I suggest http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=46.711643&lon=-79.100525
Title: Re: canqc (Quebec Provincial Highways)
Post by: mapcat on September 06, 2019, 08:17:22 pm
Do whatever you want. I'm no longer editing this set.
Title: Re: canqc (Quebec Provincial Highways)
Post by: vdeane on September 07, 2019, 05:32:50 pm
Atlas des Transports seems to disagree with OSM on whether QC 117 has been rerouted in Rouyn-Noranda (which would also affect the TCH). It puts a QC 117 marker on the supposed new alignment, but a popup when you click on the roadway identifies it as a local road, while the 117 alignment we have in the HB is classified as "nationale" along with the rest of QC 117. (In Quebec, when something is called "nationale", the nation in question usually is Quebec rather than Canada.) Also, GMSV May 2018 imagery shows QC 117 peeling away from QC 101 at the Ch. Bradley/Boul. Rideau intersection, where we have it. Absent stronger evidence that a more recent reroute has occurred, I will leave QC 117 alone (and also not go back anytime soon to field-check/reclinch that part of the TCH -- not with two known impending TCH de-clinches in SK and PEI for me to deal with).
I think MTQ decided to move where they put updates to the Atlas des transports data - the page on their site links to a newer viewer (https://geoegl.msp.gouv.qc.ca/igo2/apercu-qc/?context=mtq&zoom=10&center=-73.87043683028828,45.59930702452863&invisiblelayers=*&visiblelayers=bgr_v_sous_route_res_sup_act,parc_routier,lieuhabite,route&llca=1) that is much faster and has more recent data (the older one was missing the last A-70 extension, for example), but which only covers roads maintained by MTQ, the federal government, or through a public-private partnership (I have a separate bookmark for the older viewer for that reason).  The newer viewer has shapefiles for all of the bypass (identified as RTSS 0011709108000C), but only part of the old route (identified as RTSS 2211701020000C).  Making things more interesting, the basemap doesn't have the bypass at all and shows QC 117 on the old route, whereas the old viewer seems to have an updated basemap.

Neither offers any hints as to the current state of QC 391.  Nor does OSM.

We might have to wait for updated street view for a definitive answer as to what is going on.
Title: Re: canqc (Quebec Provincial Highways)
Post by: oscar on September 07, 2019, 06:10:02 pm
QC101
 - Ch7eRang for Chemin des 7e-et-8e-Rangs isn't quite right: Ch7eRan?

GMSV shows it signed as Rang Maltais (https://goo.gl/maps/UHgfchGyBavtJYCa9) east of QC 101, and Rang Ponteroy (https://goo.gl/maps/YWnwWe3MUhZV8QXp7) west of QC 101. Other online maps agree. I'll go with RangMal. I think I'll also stop here on second-guessing OSM on street names.

Quote
- shaping point north of QC117_W not on the highway as depicted on OSM (also QC117 and TCHKir)

Close enough. As I've said in other contexts, while I can be (overly?) perfectionist on placement of labeled waypoints, I don't view shaping points as a high-precision exercise, especially when they're shared with two other route files.

Quote
- RuePri_N and RuePri perhaps need some thinking about suffixes

Could change RuePri_N to RuePri_Ned(elec). The other RuePri (which might be named something other than Rue Principale, per other online mapping) can stay as is, especially since that point and its label are shared with two other route files (TCHKir, QC 117).

"Rue Principale" (Main Street) is such a common street name in Quebec, I'm kind of surprised it appears in only two waypoints on QC 101.

Quote
- RueSag -> RueSag_S
 - ChGolf ought to be in the middle of the roundabout (and renamed QC117_E)
 - add point at Ave1e (leads to QC111 point Rang2e)

Deferring action on the QC 117/TCHKir relocation for now, per vdeane's post.

The others to go into my local copy along with other changes previously noted, and pulled in with my next pull request (probably in Saskatchewan in the next few days).

I'll follow up later on the other comments. I have other things on my plate right now, so your comments might outrun my responses.
Title: Re: canqc (Quebec Provincial Highways)
Post by: oscar on September 07, 2019, 08:48:03 pm
QC109
 - ChLacCel is off both highway and intersection according to OSM

Fixed in my local copy.

Quote
- is Aur worth keeping?
 - Aur and DJP source for names?

Satellite view indicates something is going on at those locations, but nothing in our menu of online maps (or Google Maps) indicates what is there. @mapcat, do you remember what's there and your source (shapefiles, perhaps)?

The source might also help with the waypoints for other intersections with named roads in that region, where our usual online maps show only 800-series or higher route numbers (like route 812 at waypoint RteJoiPoi), or no name or number at all, or not even an intersection (as with MineGeaDor, PAMMCamp, or SiteBraMcL).

Removing Aur and DJP would create a visible distance error of about 25 miles. Much larger errors are common in our Arctic jurisdictions. I would not be desperate to avoid VD errors, in such a remote area of Quebec.
Title: Re: canqc (Quebec Provincial Highways)
Post by: oscar on September 07, 2019, 10:10:38 pm
QC104
 - should QC217 be merged with A-30 (one-point per interchange)?
 - RuePri_E -> RuePri

I would leave QC 104 as is:

-- I've always felt that an exception to "one point per interchange" is appropriate where two TM-mapped routes intersect with a third at different places within an interchange, so we have clearer graph connections
-- RuePri_E would have a corresponding RuePri_W point where it meets QC 104, except it also meets QC235 there

Quote
QC105
 - ChLacSteM -> ChLSM? ChLacSMar?

Or better still, ChLacSM.

Quote
- ChMar is slightly off where OSM has the intersection
 - ChPtCom is slightly off where OSM has the intersection (and the road is called Chemin du Calumet on OSM)

Both fixed in my local copy.

Quote
QC107
 - would ChBancGris be better replaced by a point at ChRie?

Yup. While I'm at it, I'd also remove ChEqu, an intersection with a minor road, not needed for shaping or otherwise.

Quote
QC108
 - additional point at Rue Main in North Hatley as important and leads to QC143 at ChShe
 - add point at Chemin Glenday in preparation for A-410 construction opening?
 - RangFon -> ChFon?

There's already a ChFon in the route file. ChFon is needed (for shaping, and in a town centre), while RangFon is not (and also is not in use), so I would delete it. Other QC 108 changes going into my local file, except there's already a RueMain in another town, so both the old and new RueMain points will get suffixes.

BTW, the TCH/QC 117 bypass of Rouyn-Noranda, discussed above, opened last month, as mentioned in AARoads (missed that while I was on the road). https://ici.radio-canada.ca/nouvelle/1257041/la-voie-de-contournement-de-rouyn-noranda-officiellement-ouverte So more changes to QC 101, as well as to the TCH and QC 117 files, will be needed before I pull in this batch of peer review changes.

si404, that part of QC 117 is a clone of the TCH file, which has been updated several times since I took over maintenance from Tim. I think further review of the concurrent part of QC 117 would be optional.
Title: Re: canqc (Quebec Provincial Highways)
Post by: mapcat on September 07, 2019, 10:23:49 pm
QC109 waypoint Aur is the road to the Aurvista gold mine (https://www.google.com/maps/@49.5353784,-78.1127304,3a,41.5y,312.25h,93.18t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sl7rRwoNO0q3Puk_BY7rnzw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656), and DJL is a gravel road with a sign saying DJL (https://www.google.com/maps/@49.588946,-78.0151033,3a,75y,186.44h,83.97t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s4iti1s2q5KARd84nTK3G7A!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) (the name of a construction company). The points certainly aren't important and, like many others in the far north, were included only to minimize VD errors.

Title: Re: canqc (Quebec Provincial Highways)
Post by: rickmastfan67 on September 07, 2019, 10:56:51 pm
Mapcat, pick a place you want the boarder to be, post it here, and I'll update my copy of ON-63 with it after making tweaks for the island addition.

I suggest http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=46.711643&lon=-79.100525

Fine with me.

Think this fix is worthy of a 'news update', or can it go under the radar since no new 'visible' points are being added to the island?
Title: Re: canqc (Quebec Provincial Highways)
Post by: oscar on September 08, 2019, 07:44:00 pm
^ I think the change is minor enough that it won't require an Updates entry.

I'll pull in the updated QC 101 file, with the new border point, along with TCH and canqc changes from the first round of canqc peer review, and cansk changes from Saskatoon. I'll probably do it tomorrow.
Title: Re: canqc (Quebec Provincial Highways)
Post by: rickmastfan67 on September 08, 2019, 10:04:23 pm
^ I think the change is minor enough that it won't require an Updates entry.

I'll pull in the updated QC 101 file, with the new border point, along with TCH and canqc changes from the first round of canqc peer review, and cansk changes from Saskatoon. I'll probably do it tomorrow.

Just pushed the ON fix.
https://github.com/TravelMapping/HighwayData/pull/3116
Title: Re: canqc (Quebec Provincial Highways)
Post by: oscar on September 09, 2019, 01:07:52 pm
https://github.com/TravelMapping/HighwayData/pull/3122 for the QC changes, including to qc.tchkir.
Title: Re: canqc (Quebec Provincial Highways)
Post by: michih on September 14, 2019, 06:32:48 am
Also some LABEL_SELFREF errors but I think that they just need to be marked FP: http://travelmapping.net/devel/datacheck.php?rg=QC
Title: Re: canqc (Quebec Provincial Highways)
Post by: oscar on September 14, 2019, 07:13:46 am
Also some LABEL_SELFREF errors but I think that they just need to be marked FP: http://travelmapping.net/devel/datacheck.php?rg=QC

I think those are "lollipop" routes that intersect themselves. When I'm back home from New Jersey, I'll mark them as FPs.
Title: Re: canqc (Quebec Provincial Highways)
Post by: si404 on September 17, 2019, 12:08:47 pm
Close enough. As I've said in other contexts, while I can be (overly?) perfectionist on placement of labeled waypoints, I don't view shaping points as a high-precision exercise, especially when they're shared with two other route files.
Noted - I won't push shaping points.
I would leave QC 104 as is:

-- I've always felt that an exception to "one point per interchange" is appropriate where two TM-mapped routes intersect with a third at different places within an interchange, so we have clearer graph connections
I agree. I put the question mark at the end of the the comment as I would personally map it as it is, even if the rules would probably prefer one point.
Quote
Or better still, ChLacSM.
Indeed!

Anyway, back to the review (there seems to be some 'OSM drift' here):

QC111:
 - ChRou is off where OSM puts the intersection
 - ChBec is slightly off where OSM puts the intersection
 - Rang1 -> Rang1e
 - Rang5e is very slightly off where OSM puts the intersection
 - RteLit -> ChCol?
 - ChLem is very slightly off where OSM puts the intersection
 - ChJosLan -> ChBoi (also very slightly off)
 - QC399 is slightly off where OSM puts the intersection
 - ChLacTru is very slightly off where OSM puts the intersection
 - RueChi is off where OSM puts the intersection
 - ChBaieCan is off where OSM puts the intersection
 - QC390 is very slightly off where OSM puts the intersection
 - CheNord -> ChNord
 - ChPio is slightly off where OSM puts the intersection (also check name)
 - ChPri is off where OSM puts the intersection
 - QC393_S is very slightly off where OSM puts the intersection
 - QC393_N is slightly off where OSM puts the intersection
 - Rte45 -> RteDupCle?
 - RueCom is very slightly off where OSM puts the intersection
 - ChPar_W is slightly off where OSM puts the intersection

QC112:
 - QC138 is slightly off where OSM puts the intersection
 - A-20/132 -> A-20?
 - separate GSJ with Rue Riverside just east of the Autoroute
 - exit numbers: aren't they QC116's?
 - QC223_N is slightly off where OSM puts the intersection
 - QC133 is slightly off where OSM puts the intersection
 - QC233 is slightly off where OSM puts the intersection
 - RangMon is slightly off where OSM puts the intersection
 - RueOst is slightly off where OSM puts the intersection
 - ChePic is very slightly off where OSM puts the intersection
 - QC241_S is very slightly off where OSM puts the intersection
 - QC243_S is slightly off where OSM puts the intersection
 - QC245 is very slightly off where OSM puts the intersection
 - CheOrfLac is slightly off where OSM puts the intersection
 - CheRoy is slightly off where OSM puts the intersection
 - A-55(33) is slightly off where OSM puts the intersection
 - A-55(33) -> A-55 ?
 - A-10(123) is slightly off where OSM puts the intersection
 - A-10(123A) -> QC249 (not a junction on A-10 or A-55, AFAICS)
 - A-10(128) is slightly off where OSM puts the intersection
 - A-410 is very slightly off where OSM puts the intersection
 - move A-610 to the centre of the roundabout
 - move RueStJean from the overpass to the link road
 - ChBas is slightly off where OSM puts the intersection
 - QC255 is slightly off where OSM puts the intersection
 - ChSta is very slightly off where OSM puts the intersection
 - 4eRang is slightly off where OSM puts the intersection
 - QC257_S is slightly off where OSM puts the intersection
 - QC257_N is very slightly off where OSM puts the intersection
 - ChPare is slightly off where OSM puts the intersection
 - QC263_N is very slightly off where OSM puts the intersection
 - QC263_S is off where OSM puts the intersection
 - *OldQC112_W - would it make more sense to have as non-starred point at Ancienne Route 112?
 - *OldQC112_W is very slightly off where OSM has the highway
 - *OldQC112_E - would it make more sense to have as non-starred point at Boulevard des Mineurs?
 - QC165 is very slightly off where OSM puts the intersection
 - QC269_S is very slightly off where OSM puts the intersection
 - QC271_N is off where OSM puts the intersection
 - QC271_S is slightly off where OSM puts the intersection
 - AvStJos is very slightly off where OSM puts the intersection
 - QC276 is very slightly off where OSM puts the intersection
 - RangBasStA is slightly off where OSM puts the intersection
 - RangBasStA -> RangBSA?
 - QC173_S is very slightly off where OSM puts the intersection
 - QC173_N is slightly off where OSM puts the intersection
 - A-73 is slightly off where OSM puts the intersection
 - AvPri is very slightly off where OSM puts the intersection
 - QC275 is slightly off where OSM puts the intersection

QC113:
 - most points are very slightly off where OSM puts the intersection - only going to explicitly point out the most egregious
 - QC386 is off where OSM puts the intersection
 - 3eRue is off where OSM puts the intersection
 - 3eRue -> 2eRue
 - BoulQue is off where OSM puts the intersection
 - ChLacQue is off where OSM puts the highway (minor road not on it)
 - ChLacCam is off where OSM puts the intersection
 - ChRivOSul is off where OSM puts the highway (minor road not on it)
 - ChRivOSul -> ChROS?
 - RuePeu is off where OSM puts the highway (minor road not on it)
 - PosAbi is off where OSM puts the highway (minor road not on it)
 - CFL209N is marked as a bridge (albeit for miles) on OSM - does it actually intersect
 - CFL209N is called Route Forestiere R1009 on OSM - relabel RF1009?
 - Parc, ChLacQue, ChRivOSul, RuePeu and PosAbi don't have intersections on OSM. Not saying there isn't one here, but that they seem to be minor.
Title: Re: canqc (Quebec Provincial Highways)
Post by: yakra on September 17, 2019, 02:29:13 pm
I agree. I put the question mark at the end of the the comment as I would personally map it as it is, even if the rules would probably prefer one point.
Would also map as-is.
Title: Re: canqc (Quebec Provincial Highways)
Post by: oscar on September 17, 2019, 04:19:37 pm
Just one comment on a tricky issue, until I have some time to address the others.


...

QC112:

...

 - A-10(123A) -> QC249 (not a junction on A-10 or A-55, AFAICS)

It's an indirect junction with the Autoroutes, since Autoroute traffic heading toward QC 249 is directed onto QC 112 (which runs on a frontage road on both sides of A-10/55) to exit onto QC 249, and traffic from QC 249 briefly uses QC 112 to get to the Autoroutes. The A-10 and A-55 route files each have a 123A point for the QC 249 intersection. Kind of how we handle exits from express lanes onto collector/distributor roads. except the collector/distributor for A-10/55 is QC 112.

Title: Re: canqc (Quebec Provincial Highways)
Post by: si404 on September 17, 2019, 04:51:31 pm
Can we get another opinion on this?
Title: Re: canqc (Quebec Provincial Highways)
Post by: Markkos1992 on September 17, 2019, 05:06:23 pm
Just one comment on a tricky issue, until I have some time to address the others.


...

QC112:

...

 - A-10(123A) -> QC249 (not a junction on A-10 or A-55, AFAICS)

It's an indirect junction with the Autoroutes, since Autoroute traffic heading toward QC 249 is directed onto QC 112 (which runs on a frontage road on both sides of A-10/55) to exit onto QC 249, and traffic from QC 249 briefly uses QC 112 to get to the Autoroutes. The A-10 and A-55 route files each have a 123A point for the QC 249 intersection. Kind of how we handle exits from express lanes onto collector/distributor roads. except the collector/distributor for A-10/55 is QC 112.



I am thinking that QC 112 should have shaping points added between the junctions on A-10 and A-55 without changing the visible points.  This would treat it a bit like FL 84 (http://travelmapping.net/hb/index.php?units=miles&u=markkos1992&r=fl.fl084), which mostly runs as a Frontage Road along I-75 and I-595, but I would definitely not consider it as concurrent with (hence continual breaking of it).

I'd recommend that rickmastfan67 look into my thoughts here.
Title: Re: canqc (Quebec Provincial Highways)
Post by: oscar on September 17, 2019, 05:12:42 pm
I am thinking that QC 112 should have shaping points added between the junctions on A-10 and A-55 without changing the visible points.  This would treat it a bit like FL 84 (http://travelmapping.net/hb/index.php?units=miles&u=markkos1992&r=fl.fl084), which mostly runs as a Frontage Road along I-75 and I-595, but I would definitely not consider it as concurrent with (hence continual breaking of it).

I already added the shaping points (one on each side of the QC 249 overpass, by about 0.2 mi.) when I synched up the A-10/A-55/QC 112/QC 249 waypoints. My own map shows that I traveled A-10 and A-55 in that area, but was not credited with mileage (km-age?) on the parallel segment of QC 112.
Title: Re: canqc (Quebec Provincial Highways)
Post by: yakra on September 17, 2019, 05:44:47 pm
Just one comment on a tricky issue, until I have some time to address the others.


...

QC112:

...

 - A-10(123A) -> QC249 (not a junction on A-10 or A-55, AFAICS)

It's an indirect junction with the Autoroutes, since Autoroute traffic heading toward QC 249 is directed onto QC 112 (which runs on a frontage road on both sides of A-10/55) to exit onto QC 249, and traffic from QC 249 briefly uses QC 112 to get to the Autoroutes. The A-10 and A-55 route files each have a 123A point for the QC 249 intersection. Kind of how we handle exits from express lanes onto collector/distributor roads. except the collector/distributor for A-10/55 is QC 112.
Reminds me of Texas, though not as straightforward as some of the examples I've dealt with. In the A10/A55 context, I'd call that a quarter interchange: worthy of a waypoint, but just barely.
In the QC112 context, I'd probably name it after the locally intersecting route, QC249, rather than that one slip ramp farther away.
Title: Re: canqc (Quebec Provincial Highways)
Post by: froggie on September 17, 2019, 08:19:54 pm
My thoughts, since I've traveled both routes a fair bit (live less than an hour-and-a-half away):

- Rename the point on QC112 to QC249 as Si originally suggests.
- Move the QC112/QC249 point to the southern junction (i.e. on QC112's eastbound lanes)
- If the QC112/QC249 point is moved to the eastbound junction, a second point (for the westbound ramps) may or may not be warranted.  I'm indifferent either way.
- Use shaping points on QC112 as needed to tweak it to follow the eastbound lanes.
- Move the 123 point on A-10 and A-55 closer to where the exit ramp is.  While the north/eastbound exit ramp can technically be used to access 112 and (via a downstream U-turn) 249, its primary purpose is to send trucks to the weigh station.
Title: Re: canqc (Quebec Provincial Highways)
Post by: oscar on September 17, 2019, 10:08:32 pm
- Rename the point on QC112 to QC249 as Si originally suggests.

Will do.

Quote
- Move the QC112/QC249 point to the southern junction (i.e. on QC112's eastbound lanes)
- If the QC112/QC249 point is moved to the eastbound junction, a second point (for the westbound ramps) may or may not be warranted.  I'm indifferent either way.
- Use shaping points on QC112 as needed to tweak it to follow the eastbound lanes.

Why the eastbound, rather than the westbound, lanes? And why not follow our usual practice for one-way couplets to put waypoints about halfway between the roadways, which in this case would be in the A-10/55 median? Moving QC112's points to the eastbound lanes would also mean no graph connection between A-10/55, QC 112, and QC 249. And the HB also would not show QC249 as an intersecting route for A-10/55, as I think it should considering QC 249 signage for the slip ramps between A-10/55 and QC 112.

Quote
- Move the 123 point on A-10 and A-55 closer to where the exit ramp is.  While the north/eastbound exit ramp can technically be used to access 112 and (via a downstream U-turn) 249, its primary purpose is to send trucks to the weigh station.

I think if we move the 123 point at all (I'm trying to minimize changes to active TCH and A- routes, lest we take forever to make everything perfect), it should be in the middle of the A-10/A-55/QC 112 interchange, rather than a ramp location. Something like this (http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=45.299506&lon=-72.100116), treating that interchange kinda like a trumpet interchange.
Title: Re: canqc (Quebec Provincial Highways)
Post by: yakra on September 17, 2019, 10:53:58 pm
I'd keep the intersection point for all four routes where it is, and retain the graph connections.
Title: Re: canqc (Quebec Provincial Highways)
Post by: rickmastfan67 on September 18, 2019, 01:20:05 am
Just one comment on a tricky issue, until I have some time to address the others.


...

QC112:

...

 - A-10(123A) -> QC249 (not a junction on A-10 or A-55, AFAICS)

It's an indirect junction with the Autoroutes, since Autoroute traffic heading toward QC 249 is directed onto QC 112 (which runs on a frontage road on both sides of A-10/55) to exit onto QC 249, and traffic from QC 249 briefly uses QC 112 to get to the Autoroutes. The A-10 and A-55 route files each have a 123A point for the QC 249 intersection. Kind of how we handle exits from express lanes onto collector/distributor roads. except the collector/distributor for A-10/55 is QC 112.



I am thinking that QC 112 should have shaping points added between the junctions on A-10 and A-55 without changing the visible points.  This would treat it a bit like FL 84 (http://travelmapping.net/hb/index.php?units=miles&u=markkos1992&r=fl.fl084), which mostly runs as a Frontage Road along I-75 and I-595, but I would definitely not consider it as concurrent with (hence continual breaking of it).

I'd recommend that rickmastfan67 look into my thoughts here.

I don't have FL-84 concurrent with I-595 there, except for the part that truly is (Exits 7 to 9C).  Hence why I added a few extra visible shaping points along it than normal, so I could keep the interchange ones still connected along the other parts.  But I might have to go back a tweak it along the I-75 part a little bit to re-add in graph connections, and a few extra visible points to break a concurrency.
Title: Re: canqc (Quebec Provincial Highways)
Post by: neroute2 on September 18, 2019, 06:42:01 am
84 no longer overlaps 595 at all, after the recent construction.
Title: Re: canqc (Quebec Provincial Highways)
Post by: rickmastfan67 on September 18, 2019, 07:04:53 am
84 no longer overlaps 595 at all, after the recent construction.

WB perhaps, but EB clearly still does.  FL-84 joins I-595's C/D lanes there, bases on all the exit signage (uses I-595 exit #'s) & overheads showing both routes.

Anyways, we should talk about this in the FL thread, not here and mess up this thread. :)
Title: Re: canqc (Quebec Provincial Highways)
Post by: yakra on September 18, 2019, 08:34:57 am
WB perhaps, but EB clearly still does.
LOL Fall River
Title: Re: canqc (Quebec Provincial Highways)
Post by: froggie on September 19, 2019, 11:36:38 am
Quote
Why the eastbound, rather than the westbound, lanes? And why not follow our usual practice for one-way couplets to put waypoints about halfway between the roadways, which in this case would be in the A-10/55 median?

Better highlights to the user that QC 112 and A-10/A-55 follow different carriageways here while avoiding the QC 112 line overlapping or crossing the A-10/A-55 line twice.

Yes, our usual practice is to put waypoints in between for one-way couplets.  But with few exceptions, we don't have two sets of carriageways, each with its own route number.

Quote
And the HB also would not show QC249 as an intersecting route for A-10/55, as I think it should considering QC 249 signage for the slip ramps between A-10/55 and QC 112.

Despite the signage, I don't see QC 249 as really intersecting A-10/A-55.  It would by far not be the first time a secondary route was signed despite the lack of a direct or semi-direct ramp connection.

Quote
I think if we move the 123 point at all (I'm trying to minimize changes to active TCH and A- routes, lest we take forever to make everything perfect), it should be in the middle of the A-10/A-55/QC 112 interchange, rather than a ramp location. Something like this, treating that interchange kinda like a trumpet interchange.

I'd concur with that.
Title: Re: canqc (Quebec Provincial Highways)
Post by: oscar on September 19, 2019, 12:41:26 pm
Quote
Why the eastbound, rather than the westbound, lanes? And why not follow our usual practice for one-way couplets to put waypoints about halfway between the roadways, which in this case would be in the A-10/55 median?

Better highlights to the user that QC 112 and A-10/A-55 follow different carriageways here while avoiding the QC 112 line overlapping or crossing the A-10/A-55 line twice.

Yes, our usual practice is to put waypoints in between for one-way couplets.  But with few exceptions, we don't have two sets of carriageways, each with its own route number.

See Interstate 65 and US 31 in Indiana, between I-65 exits 1A and 4, where in Mapview the trace for US 31 disappears under the I-65 trace except parts at the highest zoom levels. Also, Interstate H-1 and HI 92 in Hawaii between H-1 exits 15 and 18, where HI 92 is on ground level while H-1 is on the viaduct above, but their horizontal centerlines are the same.
Title: Re: canqc (Quebec Provincial Highways)
Post by: yakra on September 19, 2019, 06:31:38 pm
See Interstate 65 and US 31 in Indiana, between I-65 exits 1A and 4, where in Mapview the trace for US 31 disappears under the I-65 trace except parts at the highest zoom levels. Also, Interstate H-1 and HI 92 in Hawaii between H-1 exits 15 and 18, where HI 92 is on ground level while H-1 is on the viaduct above, but their horizontal centerlines are the same.
President George Bush Turnpike vs TX161 & TX190
TX130 vs US183
Routes 6, 79 & 138 in Fall River, MA
Title: Re: canqc (Quebec Provincial Highways)
Post by: vdeane on September 22, 2019, 02:07:07 pm
My view is that if one route travels on separate parallel carriageways (especially if they're at surface level and don't have access control) is that the two routes shouldn't be treated as concurrent.  So I wouldn't have QC 112 as concurrent with A-55/A-10, nor QC 335 with A-40 (which currently does show as concurrent).
Title: Re: canqc (Quebec Provincial Highways)
Post by: oscar on September 22, 2019, 02:24:34 pm
My view is that if one route travels on separate parallel carriageways (especially if they're at surface level and don't have access control) is that the two routes shouldn't be treated as concurrent.  So I wouldn't have QC 112 as concurrent with A-55/A-10, nor QC 335 with A-40 (which currently does show as concurrent).

There's consensus that QC 112 isn't concurrent with A-10/55, even though they share the same centerline. I put in extra shaping points on QC 112 to break the pseudo-concurrency.

We'll have to deal with QC 335/A-40 later, when I'm less swamped.
Title: Re: canqc (Quebec Provincial Highways)
Post by: si404 on September 28, 2019, 05:49:29 am
again, you might want to double check point locations as many are tiny bits off OSM (though probably are more accurate). I'm not going to list any but the ones where they definitely are off.

QC116
 - missing exit 8 (or is it part of A-30, and so A-30 -> 8
 - QC227 is off OSM
 - RteVil is off OSM
 - CheVal is off OSM
 - QC255_N is off OSM
 - QC255_S is off OSM
 - BoulKin is off OSM
 - QC218_W is off OSM
 - QC218_E is off OSM

QC117 (only going to the end not concurrent with TCH)
 - add point for u-turn GSJ next to railway in St-Laurent
 - add point for Rue de Salaberry in Bois-Franc (leads to A-15 exit 4)
 - add point for Boul Notre-Dame in Chomedey (leads to A-15 exit 8
 - A-15(14) is off OSM
 - Add point for Ch Notre-Dame in Blainville (leads to A-15 exit 28)
 - is A15 Spur an actual thing? Could/Should it be added? Would A-15Spur be better as ToA-15?
 - is QC329_S off? OSM has it at Rue Demontigny, we have it at roundabout

QC122
 - add point at Boul Lem in Drummondville (leads to A-20 at exit 175)
 - add point at Rue Brock in Drummondville (leads to A-20 at exit 179)
 - QC259 is off OSM
 - A-955 is off OSM

QC125
 - add point for Rue Jarry in St Michel (leads to A-40 at exit 74)
 - add point for Ave de l'Esplanade in Mascouche (leads to A-25 at exit 27)
 - add point for Ch St Pierre in Mascouche (leads to A-25 at exit 30)
 - QC329 is off OSM
 - PNMontTre is off OSM

QC131
 - QC337 is off OSM
 - ParcLacTau -> ChStJos (given point is at road junction as well as park boundary, that label should be used instead)

QC132 - I'll come back to this nearly 1000 mile route ;)

QC133
 - RueMon -> AvMon
 - QC202_E is off OSM
 - QC202_W is off OSM
 - QC227 is off OSM
 - QC225 is off OSM
 - add point for Chemin de la Grande-Ligne Est in Iberville (leads to A-35 exit 36)
 - RueMgrPha is off OSM
 - RueCon is off OSM
 - RueUni is off OSM
 - QC137 is off OSM
 - QC239 is off OSM

QC134
 - A-20 is not an intersection (on this road)
 - add points for GSJs on BoulTas north of QC112
 - QC112 -> QC112/116
 - add point for Boul Edouard in Greenfield Park (leads to QC116 exit 2)
 - add point for Av Victoria in Brossard (leads to A-20 exit 76)
 - add point for Boul de Rome in Brossard (leads to A-15 exit 53 and A30 exit 67)
 - add point for Rue St Henri in La Prairie (leads to A-15 exit 47)
 - add point for Boul St Jose in La Prairie (leads to A-15 exit 46)

QC136
 - does this extend to Av des Hotels (west end) and/or A-440 (east end)?

QC137
 - other than QC133 being off OSM this route is fine

QC138 (saving long route for another time)

QC139
 - QC222 is off OSM
 - A-55 is off OSM
Title: Re: canqc (Quebec Provincial Highways)
Post by: oscar on September 28, 2019, 07:47:10 am
Thanx, keep 'em coming. I'm on the road right now, and still have to catch up with most of your previous round of comments.
Title: Re: canqc (Quebec Provincial Highways)
Post by: si404 on September 28, 2019, 10:42:28 am
QC141
 - exceeds limits between border and first shaping point (I didn't notice this until I saw the more obvious one further north and put the file in the editor. Other routes may have similar relatively small dips outside the red lines - probably worth checking)
 - massively exceeds limits between QC251 and QC147_S
 - QC143 off OSM
 - A-55 off OSM
 - ChGraCou off OSM and is RueGraCou

QC143
 - A-55 is off
 - is QC216 in the right place (indirect connection via Rue Laurier, rather than anything at the overbridge)?
 - add point for Rue Aberdeen/Rue des Grandes-Fourches Sud corner (heads to QC216 GSJ)
 - add point for Rue Frontenac GSJ
 - RueTer off OSM
 - check route stays within red lines
 - ChMoo -> RteMoo?

QC147
 - ChStaBal -> ChSta?

QC148
 - ON/QC border off OSM
 - Ch4thLine -> Ch4eRang
 - add point for RueLau in Angers (leads to A-50 exit 159)
 - add point for RueGeo in Masson (leads to A-50 exit 165)
 - add point for MteeFas in Fassett (leads to A-50 exit 216)
 - add point for ChKil in Grenville-sur-la-Rouge (leads to A-50 exit 233)
 - add point for RuePri in Grenville (leads to point on QC344)
 - QC158_End -> AveBet?
 - add point for BoulInd in Saint-Eustache (leads to A-640 exit 8)?
 - add point for Boul Dagenais Ouest in Lavel-Ouest (leads to A-13 exit 17)

QC153
 - ChBou -> RteBou
 - A-55(211) off OSM, and drop exit number (only intersection with A-55)
 - add point for Rue Belgoville (links to A-55 exit 216)?
 - ToA-55/155 -> ToQC155 (or extend A-55?)

QC155
 - A-55 off OSM
 - QC153 -> ToQC153?
 - shaping point north of ChQuaVen is off OSM by quite a bit
 - ChLacSle -> ChLacGro
 - check rural points (ChQuaVen, ZEC***, ChGag, etc) locations and names
 - LanChe -> ChLan (and off OSM)
 - RteEcl off OSM
 - RteErm off OSM
 - shaping point north of 6eRang is off OSM by quite a bit

QC157
 - add point for Rue des Praries (links to A-40 exit 205)
 - BoulInd -> RueParcInd
 - BoulCapJV -> AveCapVei

QC158
 - is ChArc in the right place (should it be at link road, rather than overpass)?
 - add point for Rang St Charles in Saint-Thomas (links to A-31 at exit 7)

QC159
 - route fine beyond some points being slightly off OSM
Title: Re: canqc (Quebec Provincial Highways)
Post by: froggie on September 28, 2019, 11:24:26 am
Quote from: si404
QC143
 - is QC216 in the right place (indirect connection via Rue Laurier, rather than anything at the overbridge)?

It's a one-quadrant interchange (if one ignores that traffic can't turn left from westbound 216), so basically yes.

The basic routing for QC143 is correct.  It is signed (and IIRC shapefiles confirm), that it continues on Rue Wellington north of 216 and uses Rue Aberdeen to connect to Rue des Grandes-Fourches.

Quote
- add point for Rue Aberdeen/Rue des Grandes-Fourches Sud corner (heads to QC216 GSJ)

The route that trucks are directed to use to access QC216 (which in some ways is also signed as a truck route for QC112).  Concur that it'd be a valid point.
Title: Re: canqc (Quebec Provincial Highways)
Post by: si404 on September 28, 2019, 02:37:31 pm
The basic routing for QC143 is correct.  It is signed (and IIRC shapefiles confirm), that it continues on Rue Wellington north of 216 and uses Rue Aberdeen to connect to Rue des Grandes-Fourches.
Indeed - I was going to comment on it, but went and checked on GMSV and saw the signs follow our routing, not OSM, so I didn't mention it.

However, the route may go outside the red lines elsewhere...
Title: Re: canqc (Quebec Provincial Highways)
Post by: si404 on September 28, 2019, 03:01:10 pm
the shorter bits of QC138:

QC138 (Chevery)
 - OSM shows a section of QC138 at Chevery. Is this part of it? or is it ditched as unsigned?

QC138Tet
 - route diverted away from ferry now towards construction linking with Tab section?

QC138Tab
 - road extended eastward from End, and westwards from a couple of km south - is most of this route now not QC138?

QC138Bla
 - add point for RueJeanBai in Vieux-Fort as a better point for it than End
 - RivStPFry is off OSM, and the name is surely wrong
Title: Re: canqc (Quebec Provincial Highways)
Post by: vdeane on September 28, 2019, 03:31:39 pm
QC136
 - does this extend to Av des Hotels (west end) and/or A-440 (east end)?
Québec has two sources of route information - the newer IGO2 - Données Québec (https://geoegl.msp.gouv.qc.ca/igo2/apercu-qc/?context=mtq&zoom=10&center=-73.87043683028828,45.59930702452863&invisiblelayers=*&visiblelayers=bgr_v_sous_route_res_sup_act,parc_routier,lieuhabite,route&llca=1), with current data but which only shows roads maintained by MTQ (and the federal government and P3 agreements) and the older Atlas des transports (http://transports.atlas.gouv.qc.ca/Infrastructures/InfraClassesRoutes.asp) which doesn't have as recent data and is slower, but shows all roads.  As per these sources, the TM endpoints for QC 136 are correct.
Title: Re: canqc (Quebec Provincial Highways)
Post by: si404 on October 12, 2019, 10:41:21 am
QC132:
 - ChLar -> ChLar_N
 - RueFraBRa -> RueFarBra
 - ChStBer -> BoulLery_N or BoulReneLev_W
 - move A-20(89) to cover both sets of slips, rather than just the west-facing?
 - should A-xx(yy) format be yy(xx) format as this route has exit numbers?
 - add point(s) for BoulTra/BoulEra as leads to A-30 exit 138
 - A-20(521) -> RteMor?
 - add point for RueLau as leads to A-20 exit 606
 - add point for MteeIndCom as leads to A-20 exit 614
 - add point for AveAmo in Matane (leads to QC195 point)
 - replace RueDes with nearby RueRiv or RuePri as more major roads
 - ChJeu -> RteJeu?
 - QC197_N <-> QC197_S
 - route around BoulCapRos seems to have been replaced with new alignment
 - curve at Pabos Mills oxbowed (and the straightening just south is under-construction)
 - RteVieMou -> ChVieMou?
 - add point for RueCha in Paspebiac Ouest as major road to the interior of the peninsular?
 - RteMigWaf -> RteWaf?
 - RueEco -> RueBel?
 - add point for ChePVL at Cross Point Station as major road to the interior of the peninsular?
 - replace shaping point after ToNB11 with visible point at RueSau
 - ChMou -> ChBraNord?
 - is Parc necessary? Does it need which park it is? Would it be better in the middle of the two junctions, rather than at one?
 - ChRou -> RtePri?
 - RteStEdm -> RteLacPit?
 - A-20_End -> A-20(641)?

general points being off OSM a little and all that.
Title: Re: canqc (Quebec Provincial Highways)
Post by: oscar on October 12, 2019, 02:16:16 pm
QC132:

...

 - move A-20(89) to cover both sets of slips, rather than just the west-facing?

A-20 has three "sets" of slips, counting the direct ramp for eastbound A-20 traffic from Autoroute Rene-Levesque to Autoroute Jean-Lesage, as well as the set for A-20 east to A-25 west and both A-25 east and A-20 west from Jean-Lesage to Rene-Levesque (where the A-20(89) point is positioned), and the set from QC 132 west to A-25 west and from A-25 east and A-20 west to QC 132 east. ISTM that the existing waypoint positioning best covers all three sets of ramps.

Quote
- add point for MteeIndCom as leads to A-20 exit 614

Tim and I used Mon as the abbreviation for Montee in TCH waypoints. Mapcat used Mtee instead. That difference is discussed earlier in this thread. Care to weigh in?

I haven't changed Mtee to Mon in canqc, and won't unless you think I should.

Quote
- A-20_End -> A-20(641)?

OSM's "exit" number 641 seems not to be signed in the field. Other roundabouts that are Autoroute termini seem not to be assigned exit numbers (east end of the recently-extended A-70, and south end of A-73, come to mind). So I'd leave this alone, as well as the corresponding A-20 waypoint.
Title: Re: canqc (Quebec Provincial Highways)
Post by: si404 on October 13, 2019, 10:36:36 am
Tim and I used Mon as the abbreviation for Montee in TCH waypoints. Mapcat used Mtee instead. That difference is discussed earlier in this thread. Care to weigh in?

I haven't changed Mtee to Mon in canqc, and won't unless you think I should.
We should either have them all as Mtee, or all as Mon - that's pretty clear.

I'm not as au fait with Quebecois roads (I don't recall seeing such a road name in France - if they do use it, it isn't common) as I would like to be in order to choose which.
Title: Re: canqc (Quebec Provincial Highways)
Post by: yakra on October 13, 2019, 11:58:17 am
Tim and I used Mon as the abbreviation for Montee in TCH waypoints. Mapcat used Mtee instead. That difference is discussed earlier in this thread. Care to weigh in?
Here (http://forum.travelmapping.net/index.php?topic=2038.msg6091#msg6091) to here (http://forum.travelmapping.net/index.php?topic=2038.msg6151#msg6151).

I haven't changed Mtee to Mon in canqc, and won't unless you think I should.
We should either have them all as Mtee, or all as Mon - that's pretty clear.
Agree that standardizing is a Good Thing. I'm agnostic on which abbreviation is the "better" one; no personal preference.
That said, switching to consistently use Mtee would be easier -- there are 57 labels in QC starting with Mtee, and only 2 starting with Mon:
QC/cantch/qc.tchkir.wpt: MonSou http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=46.546215&lon=-75.428728
QC/cantch/qc.tchkir.wpt: MonMcG http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=46.557175&lon=-75.297294

If we do decide that Mon is the better option and want to switch to use that instead, that could be done programatically; I can help out with that process if needed.
Title: Re: canqc (Quebec Provincial Highways)
Post by: si404 on October 14, 2019, 06:53:28 am
QC161
 - RueLau -> RueLau_N

QC162
 - 8eRang seems a little minor. A point at Rang Anctil or no point might be better.
 - replace shaping points with visible points? northern shaping point (also QC263) near Rang Saint-Francois, which leads to point on QC218

QC165
 - fine other than the general slightly off OSM issue

QC167
 - Lac points are mostly minor. perhaps some can be purged?
 - RteObe is Route Forestiere 212 so relabel with number? There's a couple of other ones like this, but the road names actually appear on mapping.
 - HERE and ERSI imagery shows route following what's marked on OSM, and no road where trace diverges from OSM route between LacAlb and ToAerMat.

QC169
 - replace RuePlo and shaping point next to it with points at either end of RueStAnd (more major, replacing shaping point with visible)
 - add point for BoulSacCoe just to the north of Saint-Felicien (leads to QC167 point). The point at the south end is labelled BoulSacCoe_S, but there is no corresponding north point, suggesting this was strangely removed.
 - QC373_N and QC373_S -> QC373_S and QC373_N (and on QC373 the labels are backwards too). QC373_N is signed as NORD, but that's because it's at the south end and that's how we label it.
 - RteVau -> ChVau?
 - RueEdoNiq_N and RueStJean_S seem like they are wrong. Looking it actually seems likes the signed directions swap somewhere between the 2 QC373 points. Which suggest actually it's not a p-shape but a y-shape where the bits meet at the top. Perhaps change them to _W and _E absolute directions rather than the last 15 points being treated (as signed) as north-to-south rather than south-to-north like the rest of the route.
 - add point south of Alma at RteLac (leads to a QC170 point)

QC170
 - fine other than the general slightly off OSM issue

QC171
 - fine other than the general slightly off OSM issue

QC172
 - RteNilJean -> ChNilJean?
 - area around QC175 is odd. The point seems to both be in the correct place for where the mainline changes numbers, but also very much off due to junction to the south being 3/4 of the movements.

QC173
 - is 2eKen necessary? If so, is that its name?

QC175
 - AvEgl -> AvEgl_S
 - AvHot -> 22
 - ChStLou -> 23
 - AutRobBou -> A-740? It's signed on directional signage as that. Or ToA-740? If it's not A-740, it's not the Autoroute either, surely?
 - CoteAbr -> A-440? ToA-440? AvHorMer_N? CoteAbr is the road that QC175 takes, not one it intersects with.
 - QC172/RueRou area needs looking at
Title: Re: canqc (Quebec Provincial Highways)
Post by: si404 on October 16, 2019, 06:55:05 am
QC185/TCH
 - ChRivVer is not there/moved due to construction works on the A-85
 - RuePri_E off where OSM has the point
 - is the QC185/A-85 point in the right place? Is this one-point-per-interchange

QC191
 - QC291_N <-> QC291_S (swap labels as directions backwards)

QC195
 - fine other than the general "points slightly off OSM"

QC197
 - add a point on QC132 to correspond with RueMon

QC198
 - AvMiller -> AvMil

QC199
 - fine other than the general "points slightly off OSM"

QC201
 - add point for Georges-Leduc (Av/Rue de Grand-Ile?)

QC202
 - add point on QC132 at Montee du Lac to correspond with ChEgl_W
 - perhaps some hidden points could be replaced with visible points?

QC203
 - RangIrl -> Montee Irl

QC204
 - RgSteMar -> RangSteMar

QC205
 - fine other than the general "points slightly off OSM"

QC206
 - fine other than the general "points slightly off OSM"

QC207
 - MteeGraLig -> ChGraLig?

QC208
 - fine other than the general "points slightly off OSM"

QC209
 - RangMer -> Montee Mer?
Title: Re: canqc (Quebec Provincial Highways)
Post by: si404 on October 16, 2019, 08:15:50 am
QC210
 - ChGoy is gated dirt track, replace with hidden point?

QC211
 - 11eRang_S -> 11eRang (11e Rang becomes Rang de la Chute when it gains the QC211 designation)

QC212
 - fine other than the general "points slightly off OSM"

QC213
 - fine other than the general "points slightly off OSM"

QC214
 - fine other than the general "points slightly off OSM"

QC215
 - fine other than the general "points slightly off OSM"

QC216
 - add point for GSJ at Rue des Grandes-Fourches

QC217
 - QC104 moved to A-30 point and relabeled 'A-30'? (one point per interchange)

QC218
 - fine other than the general "points slightly off OSM"

QC219
 - fine other than the general "points slightly off OSM"
Title: Re: canqc (Quebec Provincial Highways)
Post by: oscar on October 16, 2019, 09:27:08 am

...

QC175

...

 - AutRobBou -> A-740? It's signed on directional signage as that. Or ToA-740? If it's not A-740, it's not the Autoroute either, surely?

The Donnees Quebec (https://geoegl.msp.gouv.qc.ca/igo2/apercu-qc/?context=mtq&zoom=10&center=-73.87043683028828,45.59930702452863&invisiblelayers=*&visiblelayers=bgr_v_sous_route_res_sup_act,parc_routier,lieuhabite,route&llca=1) official online Transports Quebec map, like its predecessor Atlas des Transports, has A-740 stopping short of QC 175, but also shows Autoroute Robert-Bourassa continues as a named but unnumbered road to QC 175.

"ToA-740" might work, except similar To____ waypoint labels have been frowned on (http://forum.travelmapping.net/index.php?topic=65.msg15446#msg15446) (but maybe something like just A-740 would not be). An A-740 waypoint label might puzzle users on why A-740 is not shown as an intersecting route for QC 175's waypoint. Then again, see the I-95 waypoint on PA 413, which is positioned at the end of a long ramp to I-95, and there are probably other examples out there.

QC185/TCH

...

 - is the QC185/A-85 point in the right place? Is this one-point-per-interchange

Assuming you mean A-85_S, it's that we decided in CHM days after the painful Arnprior experience with ON 17/ON 417 to end Canadian freeways at the last interchange, unless there is an intersection point where we could place the end (as we did with the other A-85 segment, where there is a Fin A-85 sign at 3e Rang). There is signage indicating that A-85 restarts before sortie (exit) 47 in St-Louis-du-Ha! Ha! But there is no intersection between there and ChSav. ChSav has signage indicating that QC 185 extends east of there, and A-85 doesn't end there, for now.

I plan to be out there next week. I won't be in a position to do much canqc field-checking, but can check whether anything has changed WRT to the QC 185/A-85 endpoints.
Title: Re: canqc (Quebec Provincial Highways)
Post by: si404 on October 16, 2019, 09:33:23 am
Assuming you mean A-85_S, it's that we decided in CHM days after the painful Arnprior experience with ON 17/ON 417 to end Canadian freeways at the last interchange, unless there is an intersection point where we could place the end (as we did with the other A-85 segment, where there is a Fin A-85 sign at 3e Rang).
I did indeed mean the southern junction. That all seems perfectly acceptable.
Title: Re: canqc (Quebec Provincial Highways)
Post by: vdeane on October 19, 2019, 05:30:49 pm
Question: what's going on with QC 125 just south of the northern end of A-25 (sorties 44-46)?  The current route plot appears has it overlap QC 339 to the interchange with A-25 and then following A-25, but somehow not concurrent to it (A-25 has a shaping point while QC 125 does not).

The majority of signage appears to have QC 125 follow the local road, but not all of it.  All signs at the QC 125/QC 339 junction have QC 125 on the local road, and there don't appear to be any signs on A-25 indicating an overlap with QC 125 on the segment in question.  That said, there is no signage for QC 125 at the roundabout with QC 158, and A-25 does have this sign (https://www.google.com/maps/@45.8793971,-73.6535987,3a,75y,154.89h,86.55t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s-60xLmaiM2CQe8ZSbNwhnQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192) indicating a junction with QC 125 and the QC 339 interchange.

Complicating matters further is the official sources.  Données Québec doesn't have any information of the local roads, as they're not proventially maintained, but the older Atlas des transports does.  It shows the local road as route 00125 south of  Chemin du Ruisseau St Jean, and as route 33125 north of it.  As best as I can tell, "officially" QC 125 disappears at Chemin du Ruisseau St Jean and then reappears at the QC 158 interchange on A-25.
Title: Re: canqc (Quebec Provincial Highways)
Post by: yakra on October 24, 2019, 03:46:37 pm
Quote
It shows the local road as route 00125 south of  Chemin du Ruisseau St Jean
Quote
As best as I can tell, "officially" QC 125 disappears at Chemin du Ruisseau St Jean
Same for the GeoBase 9.0 shapefiles dated 2016-08-12.

Quote
and then reappears at the QC 158 interchange on A-25.
Unclear which one you mean: the Exit 46 trumpet, or north of there, the at-grade terminus of A-25.
Shapefiles say the trumpet. I found...

QC158 roundabout:
* All of it has RTNUMBER1 = 158.
* RTNUMBER2 = 125 from where WB 158 joins the roundabout to where SB "Ancienne Route 18" (could-be QC125) leaves, and again on the short right-turn movement from where NB "Ancienne Route 18" joins to where EB 158 leaves.
* This would be consistent with 125 S of the roundabout, except that 125 is not marked there until Chemin du Ruisseau St Jean...

East toward the A-25(46) interchange (which incidentally should be relabeled on QCC158):
* RTNUMBER1 = 158 & RTNUMBER2 = 125 until hitting the A-25 ramps.
* Then, RTNUMBER1 = 25 RTNUMBER2 = 125 & RTNUMBER3 = 158 on the ramps that would carry the concurrency in either direction.

Northward, we have a triplex.

A-25's N end; at-grade 125/158 split
* The ramps in the SW quadrant are just ramps, RTNUMBER1 = 25 only.
* Mainline roads S of here, both NB & SB, are our triplex.
* The junction itself is arranged as a rectangle, as opposed to the triangle we have in OSM.
* Both E/W legs have RTNUMBER1 = 125 only.
* E leg: RTNUMBER1 = 25 only.
* W leg is split ~50/50 into 2 line segments...
* N half of W leg, RTNUMBER1 = 158 and RTENAME1FR = Autoroute 25. :P
* S half of W leg, RTNUMBER1 = 25 & RTNUMBER2 = 158.
Title: Re: canqc (Quebec Provincial Highways)
Post by: yakra on October 24, 2019, 04:47:05 pm
QC221: NY276 -> USA/CAN
Title: Re: canqc (Quebec Provincial Highways)
Post by: si404 on October 25, 2019, 06:38:46 am
QC220: fine

QC221:
 - NY276 -> USA/CAN
 - A-15 is off OSM (also QC219)
 - RangPri -> RuePri?
 - QC138 -> QC132/138 (also QC207)

QC222: fine

QC223:
 - RangRui -> ChRui?

QC224: fine

QC225: fine

QC226:
 - RteGraLig -> RteGraLig_N

QC227:
 - 16eAv -> RangBaie?
 - RueBed -> ChBed?

QC228:
 - add point for MteeStFra (leads to A-20 exit 364)

QC229:
 - RuePri_S -> RuePri?
 - add point for ChTru (leads to A-20 exit 109)?
 - add point for ChFerChe (leads to A-20 exit 102)
 - add point for ChBelRiv (leads to A-30 exit 87)
 - add point for A-30 exit 89 (also A-30)
Title: Re: canqc (Quebec Provincial Highways)
Post by: si404 on October 25, 2019, 08:27:52 am
QC230: fine

QC231:
 - add point for RuePri (leads to QC229 point at north end of town)

QC232: fine

QC233: fine

QC234: fine

QC235:
 - BoulInd -> CheCot
 - RteMic -> RteMic_N

QC236:
 - ChStLou -> ChStLou_N

QC237: fine

QC239:
 - ChStHya -> ChStHya_S

QC241: fine

QC243: fine

QC245:
 - RteNicAus -> ChNicAus?

QC247: fine

QC249: fine

QC251:
 - RuePri_E -> ChStJac?
 - CheStIsi -> RuePri_E?

QC253: fine

QC255:
 - CoteSab -> ChSandHill
 - RueChe -> RueDes

QC257: fine

QC259: fine
Title: Re: canqc (Quebec Provincial Highways)
Post by: oscar on October 26, 2019, 09:04:12 pm
Some notes on QC 117 and QC 391, from my travels earlier today:

-- There is a short paved and open QC 117 detour east of Malartic, which OSM shows as unopened. This is explicitly signed as a detour. I would ignore it.

-- QC 391's north end is still at waypoint QC117 (which will need to be renamed, with QC 117 moved to a northern bypass, which I confirmed and drove). I drove a possible northward extension of QC 391, which would re-connect it to QC 117. But no signage or other info to show that QC 391's north end has been changed.
Title: Re: canqc (Quebec Provincial Highways)
Post by: si404 on October 31, 2019, 12:36:01 pm
QC261:
 - BoulBec_E -> AvCen?
 - ChLouRiel -> ChLouRiel_S

QC263:
 - Rang3 -> 3eRang?
 - add points either end of the shortcut through Saint-Norbert-D'Arthabaska
 - add point to corrispond with RteStLou at the other end (also QC162)

QC265:
 - Rang16 -> 16eRang?

QC267: fine

QC269: fine

QC271: fine

QC273: fine

QC275:
 - 15eRue_S -> 15eAv_S
 - RueEgl -> RuePieBea?

QC276:
 - TsseFle -> RueFle

QC277: fine

QC279: fine

QC281: fine

QC283: fine

QC285: fine

QC287:
 - TvseStePer -> RueChe?
 - ChRivLoup -> ChMonk?

QC289: fine

QC291:
 - RueGare -> RuePri?

QC293:
 - Ch7Rang -> ChCan

QC295:
 - add point for RangSoc_E (given there's a hidden point there anyway)

QC296: fine

QC297:
 - RteLacMal -> RteBoby?

QC298: fine

QC299:
 - reverse (route is listed north to south, other routes south to north)
 - move RelCac to nearby RteCau, as that's actually a road
Title: Re: canqc (Quebec Provincial Highways)
Post by: si404 on December 09, 2019, 07:17:19 am
QC301 - fine

QC303 - fine

QC307
 - ChSav check name

QC309
 - OSM has a detour route near ChLaj. Check. Perhaps add points at either end?
 - Point for Rue du Pont in Mont-Laurier (leads to QC117/TCH point)
 - RueLim_E -> PontPieNev or RuePor_W
 - needs shaping north of Ferme-Neuve
 - QC311_N is off

QC311 - fine (other than QC309_N)

QC315 - fine

QC317
 - RuePri -> RuePri_N

QC321 - fine

QC321Riv
 - RueAnn_S -> RueAnn

QC323
 - ChLacIles_N -> ChLacIles
 - add point serving Lac-des-Plages

QC325 - fine

QC327 - fine

QC329
 - ChHam and ChJac check names
 - add point for MteeAlo (leads to nearby A-15 interchange)
 - RuePri_E -> RuePri_W

QC333 - fine

QC335
 - add point for BoulCon in (leads to nearby A-15 and A-19 interchanges)
 - rename A-19_End after cross-street? The A-19 point is BoulDag (perhaps should be QC335_N)

QC337 - fine

QC338
 - add point for 69eAv (leads to adjacent A-20 exit 6)
 - add point for ChStDom (leads to A-20 exit 22)

QC339
 - QC125 -> QC125_S (or merge with A-25?)

QC340
 - add point for BoulCiteJeu_E as route turns and the Blvd leads to A-40 exit 45 as a main divided highway?

QC341 - fine

QC342
 - add point for MteeBST as leads to adjacent A-40 exit 6

QC343 - fine

QC344
 - does there need to be points on A-640 and this road for the single ramps off the autoroute and the corresponding points down those roads on the provincial highway?
 - add point at BoulRolDur as leads to A-640 exit 22?
 - add point at BoulGal as leads to A-640 exit 26

QC345
 - replace RueStTho with RueRos (leads to QC131 point) and ChStPie (leads to QC347 point)

QC346 - fine

QC347
 - add point for ChStDem (also QC131) as corresponds with ChSteEme

QC348 - fine

QC349
 - check labels RangChe and RteBar
Title: Re: canqc (Quebec Provincial Highways)
Post by: si404 on December 09, 2019, 10:42:55 am
QC350 - fine

QC351
 - add point for AvMon as leads to A-55 exit 216?

QC352 - fine

QC354
 - add point for RteGui (also QC363) as leads to A-40 exit 250

QC358
 - add point for BoulLeb as leads to A-973 and A-740 exits

QC359 - fine

QC360
 - QC138_A, QC138_B, QC138_C, QC138_D -> QC138_Que, QC138_W, QC138_E, QC138_Che ?
 - add point for AvEst (leads to A-40 and A-440)
 - add point for AvBouRoy (leads to A-40)
 - replace RueCha with BoulFraLav (as more major and leads to A-440 and QC138)
 - add point for RueSei (leads to A-40)
 - add point for RueLab (leads to A-40)

QC361 - fine

QC362
 - move QC138 to overpass (also QC138)
 - add point for RtePort as leads to ferry?

QC363
 - replace hidden point in Saint-Marc-des-Carriers with point at RueBou

QC364 - fine

QC365 - fine

QC366
 - *OldA-5_S should be the label of the missing corresponding point on the surface road. Add that, and relabel current point
 - A-5_End -> ChMacLar (matches QC105 label). Relabel A-5 point there (currently QC366_E) ChMacLar or QC105/336

QC367
 - RueLes is off OSM

QC368 - fine

QC369
 - perhaps change some points to be on more major nearby roads
 - add point for RueEliII
 - add point for AvBouRoy, RueSei and BoulRay (lead to A-40 exits)

QC370 - fine

QC371 - fine

QC372 - fine

QC373
 - cf issue with QC169 and it switching directions between the two QC373 points, and apply to the _N and _S labels.

QC381 - fine

QC382 - fine

QC385 - fine

QC386
 - 7eAv -> 7eAv_W (also QC397)

QC388 - fine

QC389
 - a few points in the middle of nowhere named after hydrological features or businesses. are these necessary?

QC390
 - are RivDag and RivLois points necessary?

QC391
 - QC117 -> BoulRid

QC393 - fine

QC395
 - point for 1reAv in Amos (links to QC109/QC111 point)

QC397 - fine

QC399 - fine
Title: Re: canqc (Quebec Provincial Highways)
Post by: oscar on December 09, 2019, 12:27:01 pm
QC309
 - OSM has a detour route near ChLaj. Check. Perhaps add points at either end?

Checked it out, looks from Données Quebec (https://geoegl.msp.gouv.qc.ca/igo2/apercu-qc/?context=mtq&zoom=10&center=-73.87043683028828,45.59930702452863&invisiblelayers=*&visiblelayers=bgr_v_sous_route_res_sup_act,parc_routier,lieuhabite,route&llca=1) like a temporary detour rather than a permanent route change. But I'll add points at both ends of the detour, with the northern one probably ResFau2 (for Reserve Faunique route 2).

Rechecking the shorter detour on TCH/QC117 east of Malartic, which I had previously dismissed as a temporary detour, it looks from Donées Quebec more like a permanent route change (https://geoegl.msp.gouv.qc.ca/igo2/apercu-qc/?context=mtq&zoom=10&center=-73.87043683028828,45.59930702452863&invisiblelayers=*&visiblelayers=bgr_v_sous_route_res_sup_act,parc_routier,lieuhabite,route&llca=1). But unlike the QC 309 detour, the QC 117 detour/route change stays within lateral tolerance of the existing route as TM maps it. I'd still be inclined to ignore the QC 117 change. Something like that happened near where I live, on US 1 near Fort Belvoir, Virginia. @mapmikey made no change to that route file, apparently treating that realignment as too minor since no new or relocated waypoints were needed. I agree with that outcome, and would do same for QC 117, as nice as it was that I traveled the slightly-relocated new US 1 and QC 117 alignments.
Title: Re: canqc (Quebec Provincial Highways)
Post by: oscar on December 10, 2019, 12:10:01 pm
QC391
 - QC117 -> BoulRid

That's what I expected from the FIN 391 sign I saw at that intersection less than two months ago. However, Données Quebec (https://geoegl.msp.gouv.qc.ca/igo2/apercu-qc/?context=mtq&zoom=10&center=-73.87043683028828,45.59930702452863&invisiblelayers=*&visiblelayers=bgr_v_sous_route_res_sup_act,parc_routier,lieuhabite,route&llca=1) now puts the north end of 391 south of downtown, stopping about 0.09 mile short of the Av. Turpin intersection. I could use the AvTur intersection as the endpoint. rather than End or BoulTem_N at my eyeball guess of where DQ puts the endpoint, since a cross-street is a much clearer endpoint than End or BoulTem_N. But I'll go with End instead.

QC335
 - add point for BoulCon in (leads to nearby A-15 and A-19 interchanges)
 - rename A-19_End after cross-street? The A-19 point is BoulDag (perhaps should be QC335_N)

I previously changed QC335_N to BoulDag in the A-19 file, and will do same for QC 335. As hinted above, I have a strong preference for cross-streets as waypoint labels, unless there is no good cross-street or boundary to use (which perhaps is the QC 391 situation).

As vdeane pointed out upthread, I need to also break the pseudo-concurrency between QC 335 and A-440, like I did for A-10/55 and QC 112.
Title: Re: canqc (Quebec Provincial Highways)
Post by: vdeane on December 10, 2019, 08:37:03 pm
That's what I expected from the FIN 391 sign I saw at that intersection less than two months ago. However, Données Quebec (https://geoegl.msp.gouv.qc.ca/igo2/apercu-qc/?context=mtq&zoom=10&center=-73.87043683028828,45.59930702452863&invisiblelayers=*&visiblelayers=bgr_v_sous_route_res_sup_act,parc_routier,lieuhabite,route&llca=1) now puts the north end of 391 south of downtown, stopping about 0.09 mile short of the Av. Turpin intersection. I could use the AvTur intersection as the endpoint. rather than End or BoulTem_N at my eyeball guess of where DQ puts the endpoint, since a cross-street is a much clearer endpoint than End or BoulTem_N. But I'll go with End instead.
Given that Données Québec doesn't show locally maintained sections of road, that could easily just be the end of the part maintained by MTQ.  I think I'd keep the end where the Fin sign is, myself, unless we find other evidence of a change in endpoint.  Does Québec have any other reference information on where their routes are located?  It would be nice to not have to refer to the increasingly outdated (and no longer accessible to those who don't have the link) Atlas des transports for the locally maintained parts of the network.
Title: Re: canqc (Quebec Provincial Highways)
Post by: oscar on December 10, 2019, 09:05:09 pm
Given that Données Québec doesn't show locally maintained sections of road, that could easily just be the end of the part maintained by MTQ. I think I'd keep the end where the Fin sign is, myself, unless we find other evidence of a change in endpoint.

There's lots of remnant signage in Rouyn-Noranda, including along Boul. Rideau and other bypassed TCH segments through downtown. So I wouldn't place a lot of weight on that FIN sign, though maybe enough to keep the 391 endpoint at BoulRid.

That also gets into whether Quebec has locally-maintained segments of provincial routes. that are included in the officially-defined routes. Atlas des Transports shows (FWIW) the segments between Boul. Rideau and Av. Turpin under the same "collectrice" classification as the rest of QC 391, while QC 101/117 is shown as "nationale" (meaning, in Quebec, "provincial").

Quote
Does Québec have any other reference information on where their routes are located?  It would be nice to not have to refer to the increasingly outdated (and no longer accessible to those who don't have the link) Atlas des transports for the locally maintained parts of the network.

I'll have to ask around. It doesn't help that my French is weak enough that I have some trouble navigating the Transports Quebec site.
Title: Re: canqc (Quebec Provincial Highways)
Post by: vdeane on December 10, 2019, 09:46:11 pm
I figured those classifications were the equivalent of functional classification (https://gis3.dot.ny.gov/html5viewer/?viewer=FC) (example viewer from NY).  If the locally maintained sections aren't (or no longer are) part of the provincial system (a change may well have happened, given that the new viewer doesn't show local sections), that would naturally affect a lot more than QC 391.  The basemap still shows them (barely), but it it's not as up to date as the actual data being mapped, so it's hardly authoritative on this.
Title: Re: canqc: Quebec Provincial Highways
Post by: vdeane on January 04, 2020, 05:26:26 pm
Looking at QC138Mon, it might be a good idea to revisit the points at the est end of the A-20 overlap.  It looks like the route configuration has changed since it was drafted, and with the Turcot project closer to completion, we might be closer to the final configuration.
Title: Re: canqc: Quebec Provincial Highways
Post by: oscar on January 04, 2020, 08:38:21 pm
Looking at QC138Mon, it might be a good idea to revisit the points at the est end of the A-20 overlap.  It looks like the route configuration has changed since it was drafted, and with the Turcot project closer to completion, we might be closer to the final configuration.

Thanx for the reminder of what a mess that is. I'm inclined to simplify the routing, to follow how the traffic will flow once all the construction is complete, which apparently will follow the straighter path westbound traffic already follows through the interchange.
Title: Re: canqc: Quebec Provincial Highways
Post by: neroute2 on January 04, 2020, 08:44:10 pm
Stupid question: why is QC138Mon not the main segment?
Title: Re: canqc: Quebec Provincial Highways
Post by: oscar on January 04, 2020, 10:55:44 pm
Stupid question: why is QC138Mon not the main segment?

My wild guess is that it's because QC138Mon is only the second-longest segment of QC 138.

It does serve Quebec's capital and its largest metro area Montreal, while the "main" segment serves much less population. The "main" segment could be renamed QC138Bai or QC138Sep, for one of its two largest cities Baie-Comeau and Sept-Îles. But that would break at least two, and possibly four dozen, list files.
Title: Re: canqc: Quebec Provincial Highways
Post by: michih on January 05, 2020, 02:15:07 am
Stupid question: why is QC138Mon not the main segment?

My wild guess is that it's because QC138Mon is only the second-longest segment of QC 138.

Yes, 520mi vs. 350mi.
Title: Re: canqc: Quebec Provincial Highways
Post by: neroute2 on January 05, 2020, 07:21:42 am
You'd only break files that have points on the longer piece. 138Mon would be an alt name for main 138.
Title: Re: canqc: Quebec Provincial Highways
Post by: michih on January 05, 2020, 08:23:17 am
You'd only break files that have points on the longer piece. 138Mon would be an alt name for main 138.

oscar and charliezeb

http://travelmapping.net/hb/index.php?r=qc.qc138 (tooltip over "Total Drivers")
Title: Re: canqc: Quebec Provincial Highways
Post by: yakra on January 05, 2020, 12:38:43 pm
The longest segment of a same-bannered same-numbered route is the one that gets the blank Abbrev & City fields. There is no reason to change around which QC138 is which.
Title: Re: canqc: Quebec Provincial Highways
Post by: neroute2 on January 05, 2020, 12:49:50 pm
The longest segment of a same-bannered same-numbered route is the one that gets the blank Abbrev & City fields. There is no reason to change around which QC138 is which.

That's not the case for AR 151 or MN 62.
Title: Re: canqc: Quebec Provincial Highways
Post by: yakra on January 05, 2020, 03:54:23 pm
AR151 has existed as a usansf (http://travelmapping.net/hb/?rg=AR&sys=usansf) route since before state systems were a glimmer in anyone's eye, and possibly since before anyone involved with the project even knew about the other AR151. Hence this name gets grandfathered in to preserve existing .lists.
Looking at MN62 in mapview, it appears that may have been similarly born from usansf.

The fact that some exceptions to the rule exist, for valid reasons other than "this bit goes through a big city" doesn't mean carte blanche to go creating more exceptions willy-nilly.
Title: Re: canqc: Quebec Provincial Highways
Post by: oscar on January 05, 2020, 05:18:31 pm
One other exception is the CA 162 segments, The western one, with the blank Abbrev field, is much shorter, but unlike the eastern one with an obvious city name (Oroville), the western segment has only the small and obscure town of Covelo.

The fact that some exceptions to the rule exist, for valid reasons other than "this bit goes through a big city" doesn't mean carte blanche to go creating more exceptions willy-nilly.

Could you point me to the rule? I looked in the "System Highway Lists" page in the manual, if it's there I missed it,

I like neroute2's suggestion. That's in part because I got repeatedly confused, when I needed to edit my list file lines for the Montreal segment, that it wasn't the vanilla QC138 segment. That's what I expected from its being the first (westernmost) segment, and also the principal segment through regions with millions of people, rather than just thousands for the Baie-Comeau segment. 

That it would break charliezeb's list file (and my own, which I can deal with) is what most bothers me. I could PM him to alert him to the change if we make it. A QC138Mon alt label would prevent list file breakage for the four dozen travelers on the Montreal segment 
Title: Re: canqc: Quebec Provincial Highways
Post by: Jim on January 05, 2020, 05:27:25 pm
If the decision is to make this switch, I can easily email the owner of charliezeb.list.  He updates at least weekly, sometimes more.
Title: Re: canqc: Quebec Provincial Highways
Post by: mapcat on January 05, 2020, 05:33:56 pm
Rule or not, I would prefer staying with the common practice of reserving the blank fields for the longest segment.
Title: Re: canqc: Quebec Provincial Highways
Post by: michih on January 06, 2020, 02:29:38 am
Rule or not, I would prefer staying with the common practice of reserving the blank fields for the longest segment.

Me too. The longest route can easily be measured. Introducing a "most important route rule" or "first segment rule" would be the start of many long discussions.

The longest segment of a same-bannered same-numbered route is the one that gets the blank Abbrev & City fields. There is no reason to change around which QC138 is which.

Could you point me to the rule? I looked in the "System Highway Lists" page in the manual, if it's there I missed it,

http://travelmapping.net/devel/manual/syshwylist.php at "Connected Routes File format", last paragraph:

Quote
If there are two or more discontinuous routes of the same Route+Banner combination, each wholly within the same, single region, and one is significantly longer than the rest, the above rules would suggest using the region name for the long piece and city names for the short ones.

520mi vs. 350mi is significantly longer. I'd remove "significantly".

https://github.com/TravelMapping/Web/issues/398
Title: Re: canqc: Quebec Provincial Highways
Post by: oscar on January 06, 2020, 04:10:14 pm
Could you point me to the rule? I looked in the "System Highway Lists" page in the manual, if it's there I missed it,

http://travelmapping.net/devel/manual/syshwylist.php at "Connected Routes File format", last paragraph:

Quote
If there are two or more discontinuous routes of the same Route+Banner combination, each wholly within the same, single region, and one is significantly longer than the rest, the above rules would suggest using the region name for the long piece and city names for the short ones.

520mi vs. 350mi is significantly longer. I'd remove "significantly".

https://github.com/TravelMapping/Web/issues/398

A rather unusual placement and phrasing of the "rule":

-- We're not talking about a "connected route" here, and this would apply to both the chopped and connected routes .csv routes files.

-- "The above rules would suggest" seems to make this non-mandatory, with some discretion to "use the region name" for a shorter segment instead of the longest one where appropriate. Tim was not shy about writing no-exceptions rules, but it seems he didn't do so here.

I don't object to removing "significantly" so the default is usually to the longer segment. (But what if the shorter segment is being extended, so that it will shortly overtake the longer one? Not an issue for QC 138, since QC138Mon is not being extended anytime soon.) But a manual update should keep the longest-segment default discretionary, as I think it is now.

I would now keep QC 138 as is, but also retain existing exceptions.
Title: Re: canqc: Quebec Provincial Highways
Post by: si404 on January 06, 2020, 04:17:09 pm
(But what if the shorter segment is being extended, so that it will shortly overtake the longer one? Not an issue for QC 138, since QC138Mon is not being extended anytime soon.)
I had something similar with the S5 in Poland - but instead of the shorter segments being extended and overtaking the longer ones, it was longer segments opening (the abbreviation-less pol.s005 route was a short 2 mile bypass, but thankfully was able to finally consume the larger bits either side that were both about 50 miles long a few weeks ago).
Title: Re: canqc: Quebec Provincial Highways
Post by: si404 on January 07, 2020, 05:12:02 am
I guess I better review the 2 routes I hadn't, given their names are topics of much discussion:

QC138Mon
 - USA/CAN is slightly off (also NY30)
 - route repeatedly leaves the red lines, and thus needs shaping points (visible and invisible) south of A-30. There are other places where this happens, for certain, in this system and they need to be fixed, but this was especially egregious (like a mile outside the lines, rather than a couple of hundred feet) and definitely needs pointing out!
 - move 1 south to fork, rather than have it on overbridge of road that the junction didn't intersect with
 - A-20(63) -> 4
 - A-20(64) to RueStJac_W needs redoing (mentioned upthread)
 - add points for Rue Cherrier (leads to A-40 exit 98), Rue Valmont (leads to A-40 exit 102), Rang Sainte-Philomene (leads to A-40 exit 141), Chemin Caron (leads to A-40 exit 166) and Boulevard des Recollets (leads to A-40 exit 198)
 - add point for Boulevard de la Commune in Trois-Rivieres (leads to A-40 and BoulStMau_W skirting downtown)
 - add point for Chemin du Lac (leads to A-40 exit 300)
 - A-73 -> A-40/73
 - add point for Boulevard Masson (leads to A-40 exit 308)
 - add point for Avenue Saint-Sacrement (somewhat corresponds with east end of west section of A-440)?
 - add point for Rue Soumande (leads to A-973 exit 5)?
 - add point for Boulevard Henri-Bourassa (leads to A-440 exit 23 and A-40 exit 316)
 - QC360_A /_B /_C /_D -> town suffixes or (B and C could be directional suffixes as concurrency split)?
 - add point for Avenue d'Estimauville (leads to A-440 exit 24 and A-40 exit 318)
 - move QC362 to overpass
 - Rang2 -> RueNotDame?

QC138
 - perhaps give it a name field, but no abbrev: Baie-Comeau or Sept-Isles?
 - ChLacSed is just an overpass and not an actual junction
 - there are some points in the middle of nowhere: you might want to check the labels, and whether they are worth keeping
 - add point for Rue Monseigneur-Blanche in Sept-Iles (replace RueNap?) as it leads to the ferries
 - add point for Sept-Iles airport?
Title: Re: canqc: Quebec Provincial Highways
Post by: froggie on January 07, 2020, 10:06:35 am
AR151 has existed as a usansf (http://travelmapping.net/hb/?rg=AR&sys=usansf) route since before state systems were a glimmer in anyone's eye, and possibly since before anyone involved with the project even knew about the other AR151. Hence this name gets grandfathered in to preserve existing .lists.
Looking at MN62 in mapview, it appears that may have been similarly born from usansf.

Yes, MN 62 was part of usansf before the Minnesota state listings were created.
Title: Re: canqc: Quebec Provincial Highways
Post by: oscar on January 14, 2020, 02:00:05 pm
https://github.com/TravelMapping/HighwayData/pull/3535 incudes a variety of spot changes in QC, both cantch and canqc.

The csv files for canqc and canqca have been changed, but only to fill in city names (such as si404's suggestion to leave QC138 as is but add Baie-Comeau as a city name for the qc,qc138.wpt segment).

Other changes are mainly waypoint relabels for A-85 (Riviere-du-Loup), the two TCH routes, QC 112, QC 117, QC 198, QC 311, and QC 391.  I tweaked the west endpoint of the QC 112/A-10/A-55 false concurrency, and added hidden points to QC 335 to break its false concurrency with A-440. I also added points to QC 309 for a temporary detour north of Val-des-Bois.

This is just a start on canqc peer review changes. More to follow, as I recover from a prolonged low-level illness.
Title: Re: canqc: Quebec Provincial Highways
Post by: vdeane on January 16, 2020, 09:35:31 pm
I learned about a new data source on Québec route data today: http://www.dds.transports.gouv.qc.ca/

The interface is ancient, but the data is current (although it doesn't handle overlaps well, only returning one route).  I was able to confirm that the way we have everything routed around Rouyn-Noranda is correct.  Former QC 117 through town connecting to QC 391 is reference route 22117 on both ends.
Title: Re: canqc (Quebec Provincial Highways)
Post by: oscar on April 08, 2020, 04:17:45 pm
QC221:
 - NY276 -> USA/CAN

GMSV indicates NY 276 takes a sharp turn east just south of the border, as confirmed by the border monument and fence just north of the road, rather than connecting to QC 221 (you can cross the border at that point, but on about 0.01 mi. of pavement that isn't part of NY 276) . I would rename and relocate the NY276 point, so it doesn't synch with the corresponding QC221 point for NY 276. @yakra, do you agree, and think the QC221 point should be renamed?

QC138Mon
 - USA/CAN is slightly off (also NY30)

@yakra, do you agree that the north end of NY 30 should be tweaked? If so, please let me know what the new coordinates should be, so I can plug them in the QC138Mon route file I'm working on.

Also, the points for the north end of US 11/south end of QC 223 look off relative to the border as shown in OSM, and to a lesser extent in ESRI (including its satellite imagery) and HERE. Do shapefile data support leaving the border point as is?
Title: Re: canqc (Quebec Provincial Highways)
Post by: oscar on April 10, 2020, 07:19:11 pm
the shorter bits of QC138:

QC138 (Chevery)
 - OSM shows a section of QC138 at Chevery. Is this part of it? or is it ditched as unsigned?

I'll probably add that section, even though Transport Quebec's online maps (like Données Québec (https://geoegl.msp.gouv.qc.ca/igo2/apercu-qc/?context=mtq&zoom=10&center=-73.87043683028828,45.59930702452863&invisiblelayers=*&visiblelayers=bgr_v_sous_route_res_sup_act,parc_routier,lieuhabite,route&llca=1)) don't identify it as a QC 138 segment. They at least suggest that OSM has the endpoints right. An old post on AARoads (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=7954.msg181779#msg181779) indicates that there is a Chevery segment signed as QC 138.

It also flags a 4-km long QC 138 segment in Pakuashipi, though OSM or other online maps don't show which 4 km of the roads between the airport and the ferry dock (much longer than 4 km apart) if any are part of QC 138. I'll try some more followup. Quebec 511 (https://www.quebec511.info/en/Carte/Default.aspx) reports today that the road between the airport and the ferry dock is unnumbered (as well as closed due to bad weather); nothing, either on route number or road conditions, on the Chevery segment.

I'm also checking out a possible new QC 138 segment in La Romaine, a few km from the town to its airport. Work is already underway on a QC 138 extension from its east end in Kegaska to La Romaine, which might incorporate the existing airport road.

Quote
QC138Tet
 - route diverted away from ferry now towards construction linking with Tab section?

QC138Tab
 - road extended eastward from End, and westwards from a couple of km south - is most of this route now not QC138?

Transport Quebec's online maps indicate QC 138 still follows more or less the routings shown in the HB (I'll do some tweaks to each segment). There is a partially-completed connection between Tete-a-la-Baleine and La Tabatiere in progress, which seems likely to take over part of those segments. Maybe OSM is also right that the road to the Lac Robertson dam north of La Tabatiere will also become part of QC 138 (though it seemingly it goes in the wrong direction to help close the gap between La Tabatiere and Vieux-Fort). But none of this has changed QC 138 yet.

Quote
QC138Bla
 - add point for RueJeanBai in Vieux-Fort as a better point for it than End
 - RivStPFry is off OSM, and the name is surely wrong

In my local copy. Données Québec shows QC 138's west end where it is now, so End stays alongside the new RueJeanBai point (which might be where any future westward extension would start).

A wild card: The AARoads post above notes there is a winter snowmobile-only connection between the end of main QC 138 in Kegaska, and Blanc-Sablon, with stops in several communities along the way. While the post says it has QC 138 route markers, at least one website shows a marker similar in color and shape but with "Route Blanche" (White Route) instead of a number (https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn%3AANd9GcSm3Yh4FhIolLeLmQlwI-9gjhT5fO6G5w0YGeglhJRZxhOqPsk7&usqp=CAU). Another shows an Autoroute-like marker for "Trans-Quebec 3" (https://tourismecote-nord.com/planifiez-votre-voyage/activites-et-attraits/activites-hivernales/conditions-des-sentiers-de-motoneige/#routeblanche). Also, the route is shown on Transport Quebec online maps, but with no indication of a route number, and also a number of alternate routes and spurs. I would not add the Route Blanche.
Title: Re: canqc (Quebec Provincial Highways)
Post by: oscar on April 11, 2020, 12:42:12 pm
QC344
 - does there need to be points on A-640 and this road for the single ramps off the autoroute and the corresponding points down those roads on the provincial highway?

I don't quite understand. Are you referring to on-ramps to A-640 that don't have corresponding off-ramps and so don't have exit numbers? Like the on-ramp from Boul. des Pins between A-640 exits 2 and 8, and from Rue Eustache between A-640 exits 8 and 11?

Whatever we do for A-640 (points for those on-ramps could replace nearby shaping points), I don't see the need to add points to QC 344 for roads leading to such apparently minor connectors to A-640. Less minor connectors, leading to exit-numbered A-640 interchanges, are another story.
Title: Re: canqc (Quebec Provincial Highways)
Post by: si404 on April 11, 2020, 01:32:39 pm
I don't quite understand. Are you referring to on-ramps to A-640 that don't have corresponding off-ramps and so don't have exit numbers? Like the on-ramp from Boul. des Pins between A-640(2) and A-640(8), and from Rue Eustache between A-640(8) and A-640(11)?
Yes.
Quote
Whatever we do for A-640 (points for those on-ramps could replace nearby shaping points), I don't see the need to add points to QC 344 for roads leading to
If there are points on A-640, I can't see why you wouldn't add corresponding points on QC 344.
Quote
such apparently minor connectors to A-640. Less minor connectors, leading to exit-numbered A-640 interchanges, are another story.
So an on-ramp is minor, but an off-ramp is more major just because it would have an exit number (as entrance numbers don't typically exist apart from exit numbers, and are rarely signed)? That doesn't make sense. I get that un-numbered on-ramps are more annoying points to add than exit-numbered off-ramp, but I don't get that it's more significant: especially with distance-based exit numbering where it's so easy to give an exit a number even if its a driveway access that is very very minor. On is just as important as Off.

If you view the A-640 ramps as not warranting points (and they aren't must-add points) as being too minor, then QC 344 doesn't need them.
Title: Re: canqc: Quebec Provincial Highways
Post by: oscar on April 12, 2020, 12:51:39 am
I learned about a new data source on Québec route data today: http://www.dds.transports.gouv.qc.ca/

The interface is ancient, but the data is current (although it doesn't handle overlaps well, only returning one route).  I was able to confirm that the way we have everything routed around Rouyn-Noranda is correct.  Former QC 117 through town connecting to QC 391 is reference route 22117 on both ends.

Thanks!

And on QC 391, it shows both provincial and municipal segments, with the municipal part connecting to former QC 117 (Boul. Rideau). But it's all route 391, unlike former 117 which as you note is now route 22117. This confirms my leaving the north end of 391 as is (relabeled to BoulRid).

I agree that the interface is awful, but I should see what it has to say about some of the isolated QC 138 segments in far eastern Quebec I've been trying to sort out lately.
Title: Re: canqc (Quebec Provincial Highways)
Post by: oscar on April 12, 2020, 07:56:26 am
QC138Mon:
BSteCatFry doesbn't meet label conventions. "Baie Ste Catherine Ferry" becomes...
Quote from: manual_wayptlabels.php
If the cross road name has more than 3 words, use one of two options:
1. Pick out the two most important words besides the road type and use only those: Martin Luther King Boulevard becomes MarKingBlvd. Three words in total are included in shortened form.
BaieSteFry, BaieCatFry, SteCatFry,

Quote from: manual_wayptlabels.php
2. Pick out one important word besides the road type and use it and the initials of the other words: Martin Luther King Boulevard becomes MLKingBlvd. Two words in total are included in shortened form along with initials of the rest.
BaieSCFry, BSteCFry, or BSCatFry.

...or does it?
If I search http://cmap.m-plex.com/tools/manual_wayptlabels.php for the string "ferry", I find nothing. But ISTR a "use the ferry name" convention developing prior to the end of CHM (https://github.com/TravelMapping/HighwayData/blob/master/chm_final/cantch/pe.tchpei.wpt). Which you did?
On the one hand, I see "Tadoussac-Baie-Sainte-Catherine" as the ferry name in OSM. If the ferry name is the same at both ends, we may want to go with that (and thus in main qc.qc138 too); I like TadBSCFry the best out of the available options. FWIW, the only parallel in my work I can think of is in cannsc; the labels for ferry names (which probably (http://web.archive.org/web/20100205051344/http://the506.com/roads/NS/211.html) came (http://web.archive.org/web/20120224060812/http://www.the506.com/roads/NS/217.html) from (http://web.archive.org/web/20100205051009/http://the506.com/roads/NS/223.html) here (http://web.archive.org/web/20100205073407/http://the506.com/roads/NS/312.html)) are the same in the routes on each end.
On the other hand, the ferry could go by a different name at its two ends, and that's totally legit.
I'd be interested to hear what experience other contributors have had in naming ferry waypoints.

In Florida, rickmastfan67 renamed the waypoints for the ferry on FL A1A east of Jacksonville, for the river it crosses. Here, we could use Riv(iere)Sag(uenay)Fry for the ferry terminal waypoints on both QC138Mon and QC138. I'll pull that change in, when I finish making other changes to those long routes.

To be consistent within Quebec, I would also relabel the terminals on QC 133 and QC 158's ferry route across the St. Lawrence to StLauFry, and elsewhere on QC 133 as well as QC 223, RivRicFry. But this would not be completely consistent with other jurisdictions, including others I manage that have a hodgepodge of naming conventions for ferry routes.

For the only other ___Fry waypoint I spotted on my prowl through the route files, at the current east end of QC 138 (Tete-a-la-Baleine), the ferry doesn't cross a waterway, but rather hopscotches along the north shore of the Gulf of St. Lawrence. For that, I think the better name is Bel(la)Des(gagnes)Fry, for the ferry vessel regularly covering the route in both directions. I went with that kind of name for Geo(rge)Bla(ck)Fry in the Yukon on YT 2 and YT 9, though in that instance I could've as easily gone with Yuk(on)Riv(er)Fry.

Title: Re: canqc (Quebec Provincial Highways)
Post by: neroute2 on April 13, 2020, 11:14:31 pm
QC344
 - does there need to be points on A-640 and this road for the single ramps off the autoroute and the corresponding points down those roads on the provincial highway?

I don't quite understand. Are you referring to on-ramps to A-640 that don't have corresponding off-ramps and so don't have exit numbers? Like the on-ramp from Boul. des Pins between A-640 exits 2 and 8, and from Rue Eustache between A-640 exits 8 and 11?

Whatever we do for A-640 (points for those on-ramps could replace nearby shaping points), I don't see the need to add points to QC 344 for roads leading to such apparently minor connectors to A-640. Less minor connectors, leading to exit-numbered A-640 interchanges, are another story.

I'm with si404 here. Onramps are just as important as offramps, so they should definitely be included on 640, and if there are signs on 344 for these connections, they should be added there too. However, in these particular cases, I see nothing on 344, so maybe don't bother.
Title: Re: canqc: Quebec Provincial Highways
Post by: oscar on April 14, 2020, 04:52:34 pm
Latest round of canqc review changes (including conforming changes to some Autoroutes):

https://github.com/TravelMapping/HighwayData/pull/3756

This includes most or all changes needed to the five existing QC 138 segments. I'm still checking three short possible new QC 138 segments (La Romaine, Chevery, Pakuashipi). I've also taken care of some shorter rural routes, including all the ones with ferry waypoints.

Some of these changes will create NMPs at intersections with routes I haven't yet edited. I'll fix those in the next round. In the meantime, I'll compile a list of the routes that need more work, including the huge QC 132.
Title: Re: canqc (Quebec Provincial Highways)
Post by: oscar on April 15, 2020, 04:40:22 pm

QC112:

 - move RueStJean from the overpass to the link road

I disagree (also for similar comments on other canqc routes, but I happen to be working on this route at the moment). See my take on a similar issue in California (http://forum.travelmapping.net/index.php?topic=3472.msg18021#msg18021).
Title: Re: canqc: Quebec Provincial Highways
Post by: oscar on April 15, 2020, 09:44:08 pm
Another round of changes, mainly to long routes QC 112 and QC 167. Minor changes to intersecting routes, and fixes to NMPs created by yesterday's pull request.

https://github.com/TravelMapping/HighwayData/pull/3761
Title: Re: canqc: Quebec Provincial Highways
Post by: cl94 on April 16, 2020, 12:18:39 am
Another round of changes, mainly to long routes QC 112 and QC 167. Minor changes to intersecting routes, and fixes to NMPs created by yesterday's pull request.

https://github.com/TravelMapping/HighwayData/pull/3761

This update or another one within the past couple of days caused an issue with QC 134. 134 proceeds straight down Taschereau, but a recent update puts it on the 112/116 concurrency, only to jump back to Taschereau at the east end of the concurrency along a nonexistent road.
Title: Re: canqc: Quebec Provincial Highways
Post by: oscar on April 16, 2020, 01:02:56 am
Another round of changes, mainly to long routes QC 112 and QC 167. Minor changes to intersecting routes, and fixes to NMPs created by yesterday's pull request.

https://github.com/TravelMapping/HighwayData/pull/3761

This update or another one within the past couple of days caused an issue with QC 134. 134 proceeds straight down Taschereau, but a recent update puts it on the 112/116 concurrency, only to jump back to Taschereau at the east end of the concurrency along a nonexistent road.

Thanks! Not sure how it happened, but it was almost certainly yesterday's changes, which included waypoint changes on the QC 112/QC 116 concurrence, and were supposed to change only one waypoint label on QC 134. This error also affected my own list file.

I'll undo this unintended change to QC 134 as soon as I can, perhaps later today.
Title: Re: canqc (Quebec Provincial Highways)
Post by: oscar on April 16, 2020, 01:39:58 am

...

QC134
 - A-20 is not an intersection (on this road)

But somehow, someone managed to use that point in a list file. Perhaps that user also claimed the A-20(81) waypoint on QC 132, and the corresponding point on A-20, which really should be for the Boul. La Fayette exit/entrance rather than for Pont Jacques-Cartier (which is accessed indirectly from A-20 exit 82, not 81).

EDIT: I've already edited the QC 134 file to remove the A-20 point, fix the problem ci94 flagged, and make other changes from your review of the route. I'll also edit at least the Montreal part of the massive QC 132 file, and concurrent parts of A-15 and A-20, to move the 81 waypoint south about 0.07 mi/0.12 km to Boul. La Fayette, rename that exit number for QC 132 from A-20(81) to 81(20) +A-20(81), and similar reformats for other QC 132 exits. All that to be included in tonight's pull request.

At least one list file will be broken, but that can't be helped.

Pull request submitted: https://github.com/TravelMapping/HighwayData/pull/3762
Title: Re: canqc (Quebec Provincial Highways)
Post by: oscar on April 21, 2020, 10:51:47 am

QC366
 - *OldA-5_S should be the label of the missing corresponding point on the surface road. Add that, and relabel current point
 

@si404, please take a look at what I've done with QC366 in the vicinity of A-5 (ignore the NMP and hidden junction errors, to be fixed in my next pull request). Is that what you had in mind?

The closed points on A-5 and QC366 are guesstimates, based on the old waypoint for A-5's north end.
Title: Re: canqc: Quebec Provincial Highways
Post by: si404 on April 21, 2020, 11:17:14 am
Yes, that's what I was thinking about.
Title: Re: canqc (Quebec Provincial Highways)
Post by: oscar on April 24, 2020, 08:58:08 am
QC148
 - ON/QC border off OSM

I agree,  but this would require a change to ON 148 to keep the routes in synch. Also, while online maps agree the border point should be somewhere in the middle of the river rather than the shoreline, they disagree on where in the river.

One of Transports Quebec's online maps (http://www.dds.transports.gouv.qc.ca/) (terrible interface, but at least it shows rivers) also puts QC 148's west end in the middle of the river.

@rickmastfan67, your thoughts?
Title: Re: canqc (Quebec Provincial Highways)
Post by: rickmastfan67 on April 25, 2020, 12:35:56 pm
QC148
 - ON/QC border off OSM

I agree,  but this would require a change to ON 148 to keep the routes in synch. Also, while online maps agree the border point should be somewhere in the middle of the river rather than the shoreline, they disagree on where in the river.

One of Transports Quebec's online maps (http://www.dds.transports.gouv.qc.ca/) (terrible interface, but at least it shows rivers) also puts QC 148's west end in the middle of the river.

@rickmastfan67, your thoughts?

Choose a location, and I'll adjust the file on my end. ;)
Title: Re: canqc: Quebec Provincial Highways
Post by: oscar on April 25, 2020, 01:10:33 pm
Thanks! I'll change it for QC 148 to:

ON/QC http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=45.807314&lon=-77.042819

Included in https://github.com/TravelMapping/HighwayData/pull/3797
Title: Re: canqc: Quebec Provincial Highways
Post by: rickmastfan67 on April 26, 2020, 02:48:09 am
Thanks! I'll change it for QC 148 to:

ON/QC http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=45.807314&lon=-77.042819

Included in https://github.com/TravelMapping/HighwayData/pull/3797

ON-148 fixed in: https://github.com/TravelMapping/HighwayData/pull/3799
Title: Re: canqc: Quebec Provincial Highways
Post by: vdeane on April 26, 2020, 10:36:54 am

QC366
 - *OldA-5_S should be the label of the missing corresponding point on the surface road. Add that, and relabel current point
 

@si404, please take a look at what I've done with QC366 in the vicinity of A-5 (ignore the NMP and hidden junction errors, to be fixed in my next pull request). Is that what you had in mind?

The closed points on A-5 and QC366 are guesstimates, based on the old waypoint for A-5's north end.
Speaking of that area, I noticed QC 105 has separate points for A-5(28) and ChValWak.  Shouldn't that be a one point per interchange situation?  Someone traveling northbound on QC 105 wouldn't even drive the road between those points.
Title: Re: canqc: Quebec Provincial Highways
Post by: oscar on April 26, 2020, 11:01:14 am
Speaking of that area, I noticed QC 105 has separate points for A-5(28) and ChValWak.  Shouldn't that be a one point per interchange situation?  Someone traveling northbound on QC 105 wouldn't even drive the road between those points.

For whatever reason (maybe someone who traveled QC 105 before A-5 was extended that far), someone is using the ChValWak waypoint.
Title: Re: canqc (Quebec Provincial Highways)
Post by: oscar on April 26, 2020, 10:36:21 pm

QC263:

 - add points either end of the shortcut through Saint-Norbert-D'Arthabaska

Both of Transports Quebec's online maps confirm that the "shortcut" is part of QC263, and Rue Notre-Dame isn't (contrary to OSM). I'll adjust the route file accordingly.

Quote
- Rang3 -> 3eRang?

GMSV shows a Rang3 street blade at that intersection. This kind of simplified Rang__ signage seems common in Quebec, based on spot checks of similar differences between our waypoint labels and the names shown in OSM.
Title: Re: canqc (Quebec Provincial Highways)
Post by: oscar on April 27, 2020, 06:25:20 pm
QC344
 - does there need to be points on A-640 and this road for the single ramps off the autoroute and the corresponding points down those roads on the provincial highway?

I don't quite understand. Are you referring to on-ramps to A-640 that don't have corresponding off-ramps and so don't have exit numbers? Like the on-ramp from Boul. des Pins between A-640 exits 2 and 8, and from Rue Eustache between A-640 exits 8 and 11?

Whatever we do for A-640 (points for those on-ramps could replace nearby shaping points), I don't see the need to add points to QC 344 for roads leading to such apparently minor connectors to A-640. Less minor connectors, leading to exit-numbered A-640 interchanges, are another story.

I'm with si404 here. Onramps are just as important as offramps, so they should definitely be included on 640, and if there are signs on 344 for these connections, they should be added there too. However, in these particular cases, I see nothing on 344, so maybe don't bother.

I've added two points for on-ramps to A-640 with no corresponding off-ramps or exit numbers -- BoulLauThe between exits 2 and 8, and RueStEus between exits 8 and 11. Both replace nearby shaping points. These A-640 changes will be included in tonight's pull request, along with updates to various non-Autoroutes (and synching changes to intersecting Autoroutes) east of Montreal.

No change yet to the nearby QC344.
Title: Re: canqc: Quebec Provincial Highways
Post by: oscar on April 28, 2020, 05:50:56 am
Here's the list of routes for which I've completed updates, including changes from si404's peer review:

101 104 105 107 108 109 111 112 113 116 117 122 125
131 132 133 134 136 137 138 (all five segments already in HB) 139 141 143 147 148
153 155 157 158 159 161 162 165 167 169 170 171 172 173 175 185 195 197 198 199

201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219
220 221 223 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 239
241 243 245 247 249 251 253 255 257 259 261 263 265 267 269 271 273 275 276 277 279
281 283 285 287 293 295 298 299

301 303 307 309 311 315 317 321 321riv 323 325 327 329 333 335 337 338 339
340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 354 358 359
360 361 362 363 364 366 367 368 369 370 371 372 373
381 382 385 386 388 389 390 391 393 395 397 399

This should be all of them, subject to double-checking once the latest files are pulled in.
Title: Re: canqc (Quebec Provincial Highways)
Post by: oscar on April 29, 2020, 10:10:01 pm
QC173
 - is 2eKen necessary? If so, is that its name?

ESRI WorldStreetMap calls it "Le Deuxieme-Kennebec". (I couldn't find anything in GMSV to confirm.)

The point isn't that useful, except to avoid a visible distance error, and also perhaps for somebody who chose to turn around before the Canada/USA border. It's not in use.
Title: Re: canqc (Quebec Provincial Highways)
Post by: oscar on April 30, 2020, 02:38:26 pm
Bringing this back from the dead ...


QC138:
shapefiles have the E end here (http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=50.194242&lon=-61.267202)

Which is at the entrance to the Kegaska airport. But Transports Quebec online mapping has route 138 now continuing past the airport entrance about 1 km (http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=50.197197&lon=-61.256027). I'll move QC 138's east end there. There are a lot of photos on the Internet showing a QC 138 Fin sign at the location now shown (until tonight's pull request, since I need to make another tweak to the QC138 route file) as QC 138's east end. But Transports Quebec has been slowly extending QC 138 east toward La Romaine, so I'd conclude the route has since been extended at least to the airport and a little beyond.

BTW, there are possible isolated segments of QC 138 in La Romaine (at least from the harbor to the airport), Chevery, and Pakuashipi, some of which reportedly are signed and one of which (Chevery) is in OSM. Everything I've seen in MTQ online data shows route numbers for those segments other than 00138, so I'm inclined to treat them as "future 138" at most. @yakra, do the most recent shapefiles say anything more?
Title: Re: canqc: Quebec Provincial Highways
Post by: oscar on April 30, 2020, 08:00:12 pm
Tonight's pull request focuses on the Saguenay region of northern Quebec.

https://github.com/TravelMapping/HighwayData/pull/3824

Two notable changes:

-- The north end of QC 175 was moved to the underpass just north of Riv. Saguenay, which is also the point for the QC 172 intersection, per Transports Quebec online mapping. This eliminates a false concurrency (shown in OSM) between QC 172 and QC 175.

-- A false concurrency south of the river has also been removed. The HB right now shows a concurrency between parts of QC 175 and QC 372 in downtown Chicoutimi, which is shown in OSM. Transports Quebec mapping disagrees, showing that QC 372 continues east of QC 175 on Boul. Saguenay, or in one dataset doesn't exist at all. I couldn't find anything on the Transports Quebec website about any decommissioning of QC 372. The dataset showing QC 372 reports that it's all municipally-maintained (but still considered QC 372 -- I've seen other locally-maintained segments treated as part of otherwise provincially-maintained routes), which might explain the difference. In any case, I've moved QC 372 off the QC 175 concurrence and onto Boul. Saguenay.

I'm the only user who's driven any of the route, in October 2017, and recall the signage was consistent with the above.
Title: Re: canqc: Quebec Provincial Highways
Post by: neroute2 on April 30, 2020, 11:54:40 pm
-- The north end of QC 175 was moved to the underpass just north of Riv. Saguenay, which is also the point for the QC 172 intersection, per Transports Quebec online mapping. This eliminates a false concurrency (shown in OSM) between QC 172 and QC 175.
It's not false; it's just a large interchange, with westbound 172 not merging into the main highway until north of Rue Roussel.
Title: Re: canqc: Quebec Provincial Highways
Post by: vdeane on May 03, 2020, 07:48:35 pm
Were a couple points on QC 170 swapped at some point?  The route near QC 169 doesn't match what's shown in OSM.

Speaking of that area, I noticed QC 105 has separate points for A-5(28) and ChValWak.  Shouldn't that be a one point per interchange situation?  Someone traveling northbound on QC 105 wouldn't even drive the road between those points.

For whatever reason (maybe someone who traveled QC 105 before A-5 was extended that far), someone is using the ChValWak waypoint.
Still, the situation as it is now basically says that QC 105 can only be clinched if you travel it in the southbound direction, since northbound now has a discontinuity between ChValWak and A-5(28).
Title: Re: canqc: Quebec Provincial Highways
Post by: oscar on May 03, 2020, 08:55:21 pm
Were a couple points on QC 170 swapped at some point?  The route near QC 169 doesn't match what's shown in OSM

Good catch. I'll fix it in tomorrow's pull request.

Quote
Quote
For whatever reason (maybe someone who traveled QC 105 before A-5 was extended that far), someone is using the ChValWak waypoint.
Still, the situation as it is now basically says that QC 105 can only be clinched if you travel it in the southbound direction, since northbound now has a discontinuity between ChValWak and A-5(28).

Not really. Somebody who wants to be fussy about it can always turn left at the east roundabout, do a U-turn at the west roundabout (about the only thing I like about roundabouts is that they make U-turns easy and perfectly legal), and pick up the northbound ramp onto A-5 from the east roundabout.
Title: Re: canqc (Quebec Provincial Highways)
Post by: oscar on May 05, 2020, 05:56:25 pm

QC117 (only going to the end not concurrent with TCH)

 - add point for u-turn GSJ next to railway in St-Laurent

The U-turn roads on both sides of the railway appear to be unnamed, and I didn't see exit numbers in GMSV. Could resort to QC117_U.

Quote
- is A15 Spur an actual thing? Could/Should it be added? Would A-15Spur be better as ToA-15?

I would relabel as 46, the posted exit number for QC 117 southbound where it peels away from the southbound connector to A-15.

There's a little more to the story:

-- The connector road between A-15 and QC 117 in St. Jerome is categorized as part of the Autoroute system, in the map set that shows it (it's not shown at all in Transports Quebec's other map set). The route name is "Chemin de Raccordement A15-R117". "Chemin de Raccordement" seems to be literally, in French, "connector road".

-- That connector is not signed with that or any other name, or any route number of its own. At the northbound exit from A-15, the overhead has QC 117 and QC 333 route markers, for the routes it connects to. (In most places, there would be a "To" or "Vers" preceding the route numbers. But Transports Quebec never does that, for some reason. It's been a constant source of confusion, including for Tim who was misled about the east end of A-640 until I found a Fin banner at the actual east end.) Southbound from QC 117 to A-15(45), it's marked as A-15, also sans "To" or "Vers", or any word similar to "Spur".

I would not add the connector as a separate route to the canqc or canqca route sets, since it has no route signage other than that of the routes (A-15, QC 117, QC 333) to which it directly or indirectly connects. The Transport Quebec online map set showing the connector also categorizes ramps from Autoroutes in various other places as part of the Autoroute system, which we've not been treating as separate Autoroutes in the canqca route set.

Quote
- is QC329_S off? OSM has it at Rue Demontigny, we have it at roundabout

OSM now has it going to the roundabout, as does Transport Quebec's online map.

I've finished edits to the non-TCH part of QC 117, will pull them in later today.
Title: Re: canqc (Quebec Provincial Highways)
Post by: oscar on May 07, 2020, 10:57:26 am
I've extended QC 382 northwest about two miles, past Belleterre to eastern junction with Ch. Gains-Moore, per one of Transports Quebec's online map sets (http://www.dds.transports.gouv.qc.ca/) which identifies the Ch. Gains-Moore intersection as where the route number on Ch. LaForce-Belleterre changes from 00382 to 22791.

The two miles added are unpaved and municipally-maintained. But Transports Quebec still calls that segment part of route 382.

Ch. Gains-Moore is not shown on OSM, but is on ESRI World Street Map, from which the coordinates at both ends of the road were plucked.
Title: Re: canqc (Quebec Provincial Highways)
Post by: oscar on May 08, 2020, 01:20:01 pm
QC148

...

 - add point for RuePri in Grenville (leads to point on QC344)

...

 - add point for BoulInd in Saint-Eustache (leads to A-640 exit 8)?

ISTM that those "leads to" points would be overkill. They aren't for plausible shortcuts to the other routes. The quickest and easiest way to get from QC 148 to those points on QC 344 and A-640 would be to just take QC 344 and A-640.

QC210
 - ChGoy is gated dirt track, replace with hidden point?

The "dirt track" isn't gated, and extends several km south. There is an unpaved private driveway nearby, which is gated, and might've been what you saw. No change, other than to tweak the waypoint location.

This isn't in my pending pull request. I will try to finish off the review changes for QC210, and others in that part of Quebec, in the next few days.

QC143
 
. . .

 - check route stays within red lines

There were a few instances of straying outside the lines, which I've fixed. In addition, the HB's routing north of A-20 follows Transports Quebec's mapping, not OSM's routing through St-Majorique-de-Grantham, so I stuck with what we had.
Title: Re: canqc: Quebec Provincial Highways
Post by: oscar on May 13, 2020, 04:58:37 am
Also, in my next pull request our mapping of QC 327's north end will be extended about 2.5 miles past Mont-Tremblant-Village, over Ch. du Village and Ch. de la Chapelle, to the south end of Lac Tremblant and near the Tremblant ski area. As with QC 382, the added mileage is municipally-maintained.

Oddly enough, the best route from the TCH to the ski area seems to be via unnumbered (except with internal inventory numbers) but Transports Quebec-maintained Montee Ryan and Ch. Duplessis. And there seems to be no route signage on Ch. de la Chapelle, or at its intersection with Ch. du Village. I guess Transports Quebec decided to keep Mont-Tremblant-Village on QC 327, and have the route continue to the ski area via the Lac Tremblant lakefront. Anyway, I'm just going with Transports Quebec's online mapping here, which is consistent with OSM's mapping (except for Ch. de la Chapelle).
Title: Re: canqc (Quebec Provincial Highways)
Post by: oscar on May 15, 2020, 06:13:58 am
QC131
  - ParcLacTau -> ChStJos (given point is at road junction as well as park boundary, that label should be used instead)

Actually, Transports Quebec's online mapping has QC 131 ending at Rue des Aulnais in St-Michel-des-Saints, rather than at the park boundary, or well into the park as OSM has it. Beyond existing waypoint RueAul, Rue Brassard and Ch. Lac-Trudeau are route 34131 rather than 00131. Truncating to RueAul. 

I checked the north end of QC 125, another highway with a dangling end in the middle of nowhere rather than at another highway. Its endpoint is more or less where the HB already has it.

I'm working on the last batch of a half-dozen routes north of Montreal that still need review updates. Once that's done, canqc will be ready for a final pre-activation once-over.
Title: canqc almost ready for activation (was: canqc: Quebec Provincial Highways)
Post by: oscar on May 16, 2020, 04:21:00 pm
Yesterday, I pulled in the last canqc route files responding to si404's and other peer review comments, and also making other fixes I identified. A followup pull request will fix the one remaining set of NMPs, at A-40 exit 76. All other errors have been fixed or marked as FPs, except for visible distance errors that will be washed away upon activation.

I plan to do some double-checking over the next few days, to make sure I've addressed all the comments, didn't create problems like the misrouting @vdeane spotted for QC 170 and a similar one I created and fixed for QC 249 in Asbestos, and otherwise make sure canqc is ready for activation.

Any help on the double-checking would be appreciated. A few things to keep in mind:

-- As I noted in previous posts, there are some places where the official route (as confirmed by Transport Quebec's online mapping) differs from what OSM shows, either longer or shorter, or following a different alignment. Another one I didn't mention above is that OSM and ESRI have QC 276 following a different routing to St-Odilon-de-Cranborne than does official mapping. If you find any that aren't mentioned here or upthread, they might be errors I need to fix.

--  Online maps often differ with each other, or with signs shown in GMSV, on the names of intersecting routes. I've tried to get the names right, generally following the ones in @mapcat's draft of the canqc system, since he did a lot of GMSV checks to resolve conflicting data. I'm not convinced that any remaining errors will often throw off users, so I would not worry about waypoint labels (especially for the less important intersections).

-- Any comments on how I dealt with the messy A-25/A-440/QC 125 interchange in Laval? Moving the waypoint to the A-25/QC 125 intersection from the middle of the A-25/A-440 triangle better reflects that the interchange serves QC 125 and not just A-25 and A-440, with direct ramp connections from QC 125 to A-25. But I'm not sure about routing QC 125 via A-440(34), when northbound QC 125 traffic goes east of that point (southbound QC 125 traffic has to go through that point, to connect to the QC 125/A-440 concurrency).

-- @yakra, I threw out some questions in various posts that shapefiles could help answer, especially for New York border points, and three remote possible QC 138 segments between Kegaska and Vieux-Fort that might be added to the HB. These issues could be addressed post-activation.

On the latter, as I explain above and over at the aaroads forum (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=7954.msg2490929#msg2490929), I'm inclined to treat the three "missing" QC 138 segments as "future QC 138" at most, and leave them out of the HB (even the one OSM shows in Chevery) at this time. But shapefile data could change my mind.

I'd like to activate canqc next week, preferably by Thursday 5/21.
Title: Re: canqc (Quebec Provincial Highways)
Post by: oscar on May 17, 2020, 03:57:49 pm
QC141
 - exceeds limits between border and first shaping point (I didn't notice this until I saw the more obvious one further north and put the file in the editor. Other routes may have similar relatively small dips outside the red lines - probably worth checking)
 - massively exceeds limits between QC251 and QC147_S
 

Missed these. Fix is in my next cleanup pull request.

Quote
- ChGraCou off OSM and is RueGraCou

GMSV shows the street sign starts with "Ch(emin)" rather than "Rue". Don't believe everything you see in OSM! No label change (but the waypoint was repositioned).

QC155
 - check rural points (ChQuaVen, ZEC***, ChGag, etc) locations and names

"ZEC" means "zone d'exploitation contrôlée" (controlled harvesting zone, for hunting or fishing). Where there is no intersecting road, not a useful waypoint. I've been removing ZEC waypoints, or turning them into hidden shaping points, with a possible exception here and there if there's an unnamed road entering a ZEC.

ChQuaVen is one of several roads in that area that show up in HERE mapping and satellite imagery, but not in OSM or ESRI. I pulled the coordinates from HERE, with a little fudging to put them in the OSM route trace. The ChGag waypoint is at the location shown in HERE and ESRI satellite imagery and maps, rather than where OSM puts it.

QC157
 - add point for Rue des Praries (links to A-40 exit 205)

Added, as well as similar one for Ch. du Passage (to A-40 exit 202).
Title: Re: canqc (Quebec Provincial Highways)
Post by: oscar on May 17, 2020, 07:37:40 pm
Question: what's going on with QC 125 just south of the northern end of A-25 (sorties 44-46)?  The current route plot appears has it overlap QC 339 to the interchange with A-25 and then following A-25, but somehow not concurrent to it (A-25 has a shaping point while QC 125 does not).

The majority of signage appears to have QC 125 follow the local road, but not all of it.  All signs at the QC 125/QC 339 junction have QC 125 on the local road, and there don't appear to be any signs on A-25 indicating an overlap with QC 125 on the segment in question.  That said, there is no signage for QC 125 at the roundabout with QC 158, and A-25 does have this sign (https://www.google.com/maps/@45.8793971,-73.6535987,3a,75y,154.89h,86.55t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s-60xLmaiM2CQe8ZSbNwhnQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192) indicating a junction with QC 125 and the QC 339 interchange.

Complicating matters further is the official sources.  Données Québec doesn't have any information of the local roads, as they're not proventially maintained, but the older Atlas des transports does.  It shows the local road as route 00125 south of  Chemin du Ruisseau St Jean, and as route 33125 north of it.  As best as I can tell, "officially" QC 125 disappears at Chemin du Ruisseau St Jean and then reappears at the QC 158 interchange on A-25.

I think the upshot of this, and @yakra's reply to that post, is that I need to belatedly add +x12 on A-25 to QC 125 (already in my local copy, but not yet pulled in). Unless I need to pull QC 125 onto the local road north of QC 339, with the concurrency with A-25 beginning at A-25 exit 46 (and possibly a concurrency with QC 158 beginning at the roundabout just west of A-25 where Rang de la Cote-Saint-Louis goes north into Saint-Esprit)? Or even split QC 125 into two segments, with most users traveling the shorter southern Montreal segment but at least one traveling the northern Rawdon segment? The split would have the southern segment ending at Ch. Ruisseau St-Jean, and the northern segment starting at the QC 158 roundabout just west of A-25 exit 46, so we'd be splitting the route to account for an apparent gap of less than a mile.

I'm confused, as is perhaps MTQ.

EDIT: Just reviewed the online provincial road map (https://www.quebec511.info/en/Carte/Default.aspx) for Quebec's 511 system. It has QC 125 hopping onto A-25 at exit 44, and concurrent with A-25 until the Autoroute's terminus in Saint-Esprit, at which point QC 125 peels away from QC 158 and continues NW. That's consistent with leaving QC 125 as it is in the HB. OTOH, the 511 interactive map is just using Google's base map, no original cartography unlike the two Transports Quebec online mapping systems. Quebec 511 also has an online version of the official road map (https://www.quebec511.info/en/carte_routiere/index.asp), with regional sub-maps and original cartography (even reflecting Quebec's stance in its persistent territorial dispute with Labrador), but not enough detail to show QC 125's routing north of A-25 exit 44.
Title: Re: canqc: Quebec Provincial Highways
Post by: oscar on May 19, 2020, 06:12:28 am
Bumping this up, so it doesn't get lost in the noise.

I'm done with my double-checking, and I think the system is generally ready for activation. But there is still an unresolved issue about QC 125 discussed in the preceding post, following up on comments by @vdeane and @yakra, as well as others mentioned upthread (some of which could be addressed post-activation). Could I please get some comments on the QC 125 issue, at least, as well as anything else that should be addressed pre-activation?
Title: Re: canqc: Quebec Provincial Highways
Post by: oscar on May 20, 2020, 08:46:30 am
https://github.com/TravelMapping/HighwayData/pull/3899 implements a split of QC 125, to reflect the ~1 mile route gap shown in Transports Quebec's online mapping and shapefiles (http://forum.travelmapping.net/index.php?topic=2038.msg16006#msg16006). This follows what I outlined above:

Unless I need to pull QC 125 onto the local road north of QC 339, with the concurrency with A-25 beginning at A-25 exit 46 (and possibly a concurrency with QC 158 beginning at the roundabout just west of A-25 where Rang de la Cote-Saint-Louis goes north into Saint-Esprit)? Or even split QC 125 into two segments, with most users traveling the shorter southern Montreal segment but at least one traveling the northern Rawdon segment? The split would have the southern segment ending at Ch. Ruisseau St-Jean, and the northern segment starting at the QC 158 roundabout just west of A-25 exit 46, so we'd be splitting the route to account for an apparent gap of less than a mile.

Note that this will break some list files, including Jim's, since the most heavily-traveled part of QC 125 seems to be the southern Montreal segment, which as the shorter segment gets the route file with the city abbreviation (qc.qc125mon).

@si404, @yakra, @vdeane, any comments (here or on Github)?

Nailing this down will probably be the last step needed before activation, hopefully tomorrow or Friday.

Title: Re: canqc: Quebec Provincial Highways
Post by: vdeane on May 20, 2020, 11:19:06 am
I agree with splitting the file for QC 125.  No comments on the southern section.  Regarding the end of the northern section, I'll take yakra's word on the shapefiles.  With respect to signage, it's as ambiguous as always (wouldn't it be nice if MTQ used to banners?).  There's no signage of it leaving the roundabout (https://www.google.com/maps/@45.8862099,-73.6682458,3a,75y,97.7h,83.25t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s6pdtbUpV-fChlFW1Zxn3xA!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo1.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3D6pdtbUpV-fChlFW1Zxn3xA%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D236.44104%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192).  Northbound signage would have it begin at the A-25_S point (https://www.google.com/maps/@45.8856262,-73.6649569,3a,75y,123.25h,77.36t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1so3tXHtJ6qEg8buS3InPErw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192), which southbound signage seems to be supplemental in nature (https://www.google.com/maps/@45.9048638,-73.6630871,3a,26.5y,146.25h,87.82t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sG_hn3cKv5dIdQeezxfZcTA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192), leaving one to wonder if it's meant to be "to" signage (if so, it would start at the QC158_E point).  Given the ambiguity in the southbound signage, I would probably go with the less ambiguous northbound signage, but there is a case to be made for the roundabout as well if the shapefiles have QC 125 between there and the trumpet.
Title: QC 125 split (was: canqc: Quebec Provincial Highways)
Post by: oscar on May 20, 2020, 10:02:27 pm
Tonight's update splits QC 125 in two, to deal with a ~1-mile mystery gap in the route south of Saint-Esprit. The change also moves QC 125 from a small part of QC 339, and A-25 between exits 44 and 46, onto a surface road west of A-25 plus a small part of QC 158. That surface road is QC 125 between QC 339 and Ch. Ruisseau-St-Jean, and Ancienne Route 125 (inventoried route 33125) the rest of the way to QC 158. I have no idea why Anc. Rte. 125 was removed from QC 125.

Users who claimed mileage (km-age?) on QC 125 south of Saint-Esprit will need to adjust their list files. The route north of there remains qc.qc125.wpt (QC125). South of there to Montreal, QC 125 is in the new route file qc.qc125mon.wpt (QC125Mon), since that segment is much shorter than the part north of St-Esprit.

canqc is not yet an active system. It may become one soon, perhaps later this week.
Title: Re: canqc: Quebec Provincial Highways
Post by: yakra on May 21, 2020, 08:43:26 pm
@si404, @yakra, @vdeane, any comments (here or on Github)?
My apologies, I've had a browser tab open for a LONG time and have been meaning to get back to this thread. I there were some items you tagged me on upthread that I never got back to.
I meant to have a look yesterday, and then finishing up a big .list processing enhancements (https://github.com/TravelMapping/DataProcessing/pull/330) pull request took longer than expected. And then today, got hung up on discussing a recent superior court judgment in which my parents were plaintiffs. But that's all out of the way now, so I guess I'd best get oan it!
Title: Re: canqc: Quebec Provincial Highways
Post by: oscar on May 21, 2020, 09:11:01 pm
@si404, @yakra, @vdeane, any comments (here or on Github)?
My apologies, I've had a browser tab open for a LONG time and have been meaning to get back to this thread. I there were some items you tagged me on upthread that I never got back to.
I meant to have a look yesterday, and then finishing up a big .list processing enhancements (https://github.com/TravelMapping/DataProcessing/pull/330) pull request took longer than expected. And then today, got hung up on discussing a recent superior court judgment in which my parents were plaintiffs. But that's all out of the way now, so I guess I'd best get oan it!

Thanx. I was going to activate tomorrow, but can wait for you, at least on anything that should be done pre-activation. I think the only thing in that category is the changes I just made to QC 125. Things like NY border points, and whether to add more QC 138 segments in far eastern Quebec, can be addressed post-activation.
Title: Re: canqc: Quebec Provincial Highways
Post by: yakra on May 25, 2020, 12:44:08 am
Responding to items brought up in this thread, and stuff I noticed in the process. Not doing any full-fledged in-depth review of course. :)

QC185/TCH
...
 - is the QC185/A-85 point in the right place? Is this one-point-per-interchange
Assuming you mean A-85_S, it's that we decided in CHM days after the painful Arnprior experience with ON 17/ON 417 to end Canadian freeways at the last interchange, unless there is an intersection point where we could place the end (as we did with the other A-85 segment, where there is a Fin A-85 sign at 3e Rang). There is signage indicating that A-85 restarts before sortie (exit) 47 in St-Louis-du-Ha! Ha! But there is no intersection between there and ChSav. ChSav has signage indicating that QC 185 extends east of there, and A-85 doesn't end there, for now.
That all being said, it looks as if Exit 47 would be better served as a "misbehaving parclo" to the west.

QC236: ChStLou_E -> ChStLou_N?
QC309: Is ChLaj semi-important or likely to be used by travelers? If not, Chemin du Rubis to the east would do a better job of shaping.
QC340: The hyphenation at BoulCitJeu_E makes things a little quirky, but I think Si's original recommendation of BoulCiteJeu_E is arguably a better option.
QC342: MteeBStTho -> something else (http://travelmapping.net/devel/manual/wayptlabels.php#truncate)
QC344: add point at BoulGau as leads to A-640 exit 26

QC360
 - QC138_A, QC138_B, QC138_C, QC138_D -> QC138_Que, QC138_W, QC138_E, QC138_Che ?
Despite the change having already been made, IMO with these point all connecting to the same chopped route, _A _B _C _D might be the less ambiguous option.

QC366: *OldA-5_S -> *OldA-5
QC369: RueSei is placed on Avenue Sainte-Therese rather than QC369.

QC395
 - point for 1reAv in Amos (links to QC109/QC111 point)
At first I thought that was a typo, but nope, it's signed that way (https://www.google.com/maps/@48.5718757,-78.1063963,3a,15y,156.69h,96.52t/data=!3m9!1e1!3m7!1sNFEuDwFAqh90HSvhKAfY4Q!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!9m2!1b1!2i40)!
Looks like premier and première (https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/1re) have their own suffixes, not unlike English's "st" (& "nd" & "rd") vice the usual "th".
(http://www.quickmeme.com/img/db/db394de7b4d0e84d98d58498e8ddcfafd2af21fe9e8745b2c07abc3027351f85.jpg)

QC138Mon
 - USA/CAN is slightly off (also NY30)
The point is a bit N of the border per OSM, and a bit S per ESRI.
What do NYS shapefiles have to say?
The MilepointRoute2015 and Cities_Towns shapefile sets are at different scales / different levels of precision. Consequently:
• The arc representing NY30 crosses the edge of the Constable polygon here (http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=44.992077&lon=-74.308186), corresponding to where OSM has the border.
• The northernmost extent of the NY30 arc is here (http://), fairly close to where the current waypoint is, but still a bit south of where ESRI has the border.
In light of all this, I'm fine with going no-build. Or I could change to something closer to OSM if Oscar wants to.

A-20(63) -> 4
Oh dear. And since this qualifies QC138 as a route with its own exit numbers, possibly A-20(64) -> 64(20)?
Does this happen elsewhere in the system?

Add a point in the middle of the rectangle bounded by Rue Notre-Dame Centre, Rue Saint-Georges, Rue Royale, Rue Saint-Roch -- leads to A-40 exit 199 and helps clarify the routing in the area a bit.

- QC360_A /_B /_C /_D -> town suffixes or (B and C could be directional suffixes as concurrency split)?
See above

QC221:
 - NY276 -> USA/CAN
GMSV indicates NY 276 takes a sharp turn east just south of the border, as confirmed by the border monument and fence just north of the road, rather than connecting to QC 221 (you can cross the border at that point, but on about 0.01 mi. of pavement that isn't part of NY 276) . I would rename and relocate the NY276 point, so it doesn't synch with the corresponding QC221 point for NY 276. @yakra, do you agree, and think the QC221 point should be renamed?
I see that you've made the the corresponding changes on the QC side, and marked a FP NMP. The point on NY276 isn't off by much, but can still use a tweak, so it gets one. I can take care of changing the nmpfps.log entry along with. Got some other stuff to flag in NY anyway. Can't find a known road name for this short connector to QC221 -- so with a quick check of the manual, it looks like ToQC221 is the way to to go.
https://github.com/TravelMapping/HighwayData/pull/3914

Also, the points for the north end of US 11/south end of QC 223 look off relative to the border as shown in OSM, and to a lesser extent in ESRI (including its satellite imagery) and HERE. Do shapefile data support leaving the border point as is?
Similar situation to NY30. I get coords here (http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=45.010333&lon=-73.370876) and here (http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=45.010467&lon=-73.370903).

Ferry names: I'd say, if there's no official name to use, just the unadorned Fry is sufficient.

Speaking of that area, I noticed QC 105 has separate points for A-5(28) and ChValWak.  Shouldn't that be a one point per interchange situation?  Someone traveling northbound on QC 105 wouldn't even drive the road between those points.
For whatever reason (maybe someone who traveled QC 105 before A-5 was extended that far), someone is using the ChValWak waypoint.
If there were another numbered route involved here I might think differently, but... I'd recommend folding ChValWak into A-5(28) as an AltLabel.
The traveler is 7_8, whose clinched segment leads north. (http://travelmapping.net/hb/?units=miles&u=7_8&r=qc.qc105&lat=45.626792&lon=-75.936806&zoom=15)

BTW, there are possible isolated segments of QC 138 in La Romaine (at least from the harbor to the airport), Chevery, and Pakuashipi, some of which reportedly are signed and one of which (Chevery) is in OSM. Everything I've seen in MTQ online data shows route numbers for those segments other than 00138, so I'm inclined to treat them as "future 138" at most. @yakra, do the most recent shapefiles say anything more?
Nothing more recent. Still working with data from 2016. :(
GeoBase seems to have slowed down big time on, if not forgotten entirely, updating the NRN shapefiles. NS & PE were updated in 2018; everything else...
(Maybe I gotta dig up a new link? I've tried occasionally, with little success...)

-- Any comments on how I dealt with the messy A-25/A-440/QC 125 interchange in Laval?
I made sure to have a look in the HDX before reading the rest of your thoughts, to see what solution I'd lean towards without any pre-bias.
Aye Caramba.

Moving the waypoint to the A-25/QC 125 intersection from the middle of the A-25/A-440 triangle better reflects that the interchange serves QC 125 and not just A-25 and A-440, with direct ramp connections from QC 125 to A-25.
My first thoughts were that this might lend itself to a 1PPI solution. The triangle, along with the QC125 at-grade junction thrown into the mix.

But I'm not sure about routing QC 125 via A-440(34),
What struck me was the angle of the final segment of A-440. Judging by a numbered Exit 34 being where it is (I'm not checking GMSV right now) it looks like A-440 heads south on the west leg, from the A-25 split at the N end of the triangle. The route trace looks awkward, but in a sense checks out in that A-440 continues to A-25, and that's where A-25's point is.

when northbound QC 125 traffic goes east of that point (southbound QC 125 traffic has to go through that point, to connect to the QC 125/A-440 concurrency).
Nonetheless I think 1PPI may be the cleanest -- a "correct by way of vagueness" -- solution here.
With the Masson/Marcel-Villeneuve intersection right on one edge of the central triangle, you could let this weight your judgment of where the triangle's center is.
I took the I-97@7 example to extremes, and considered where traffic would go if the thru lanes weren't available, if one were to exit & re-enter the highway. The inside-the-triangle, left-turn-ish movements would pass thru that intersection. The outside-the-triangle, right-turn-ish movements would be a little ways out on each leg.

There's another situation like this in TX, with a central ramp triangle, and a junction of at-grade routes right on one of its legs.
The main difference is there's not the added complication of a surface route joining/leaving a freeway via some funky ramps that QC has. (But there's still access between all the things because frontage roads.)
Here's how I handled it:
(http://yakra.teresco.org/images/14-35-190-317-436.png)
ISTR pondering whether to slide the point a bit more SSW, and could just as easily have done so.



I've yet to read http://forum.travelmapping.net/index.php?topic=2038.msg18656#msg18656 onwards. Done. No further comments.
Title: Re: canqc: Quebec Provincial Highways
Post by: yakra on May 25, 2020, 01:53:18 pm
No objections on how the QC125 split was handled. It's an imperfect situation begging for an imperfect solution.
That does it for my comments.
Title: Re: canqc: Quebec Provincial Highways
Post by: oscar on May 27, 2020, 06:55:31 pm
QC185/TCH
...
 - is the QC185/A-85 point in the right place? Is this one-point-per-interchange
Assuming you mean A-85_S, it's that we decided in CHM days after the painful Arnprior experience with ON 17/ON 417 to end Canadian freeways at the last interchange, unless there is an intersection point where we could place the end (as we did with the other A-85 segment, where there is a Fin A-85 sign at 3e Rang). There is signage indicating that A-85 restarts before sortie (exit) 47 in St-Louis-du-Ha! Ha! But there is no intersection between there and ChSav. ChSav has signage indicating that QC 185 extends east of there, and A-85 doesn't end there, for now.
That all being said, it looks as if Exit 47 would be better served as a "misbehaving parclo" to the west.

I don't see the advantage, especially since the RIRO ramps from/to SB A-85 are about 0.25 km north of the NB ramps. Using either as the 47 point location would add up to 0.8 km to canqca and subtract it from canqc ... for now, since Transports Quebec has begun construction on filling in the gap between the A-85 segments, which in a few years will fold all of QC 185 into A-85.

Quote
QC309: Is ChLaj semi-important or likely to be used by travelers? If not, Chemin du Rubis to the east would do a better job of shaping.

ChLaj is adequate for shaping purposes. It also is, or connects to, a much longer road than Ch. Rubis which dead-ends in less than 2 km.
 
Quote
QC342: MteeBStTho -> something else (http://travelmapping.net/devel/manual/wayptlabels.php#truncate)

MteeBaieST?

Quote
QC360
 - QC138_A, QC138_B, QC138_C, QC138_D -> QC138_Que, QC138_W, QC138_E, QC138_Che ?
Despite the change having already been made, IMO with these point all connecting to the same chopped route, _A _B _C _D might be the less ambiguous option.

My initial preference was _A, _B,  _C,  _D. But I deferred to si404, and would rather stick with that, even though changing back would not be difficult for either QC 138 or QC 360.

Quote
QC138Mon
 - USA/CAN is slightly off (also NY30)
The point is a bit N of the border per OSM, and a bit S per ESRI.
What do NYS shapefiles have to say?
The MilepointRoute2015 and Cities_Towns shapefile sets are at different scales / different levels of precision. Consequently:
• The arc representing NY30 crosses the edge of the Constable polygon here (http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=44.992077&lon=-74.308186), corresponding to where OSM has the border.
• The northernmost extent of the NY30 arc is here (http://), fairly close to where the current waypoint is, but still a bit south of where ESRI has the border.
In light of all this, I'm fine with going no-build. Or I could change to something closer to OSM if Oscar wants to.

Thanx for checking. I would leave this one alone.

Quote
A-20(63) -> 4
Oh dear. And since this qualifies QC138 as a route with its own exit numbers, possibly A-20(64) -> 64(20)?
Does this happen elsewhere in the system?

I'll change 4 back to A-20(63).

As for other examples, I'm scratching my head on that one. The one that comes to mind is QC 116 near Montreal, which has its own exit numbers, including on a segment concurrent with QC 112.

Also, the points for the north end of US 11/south end of QC 223 look off relative to the border as shown in OSM, and to a lesser extent in ESRI (including its satellite imagery) and HERE. Do shapefile data support leaving the border point as is?
Similar situation to NY30. I get coords here (http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=45.010333&lon=-73.370876) and here (http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=45.010467&lon=-73.370903).

The second set of coords are pretty close to the existing USA/CAN coordinates. The first are close to the border as shown in OSM. I would say the "shapefile data support leaving the border point as is". No action needed.

Quote
BTW, there are possible isolated segments of QC 138 in La Romaine (at least from the harbor to the airport), Chevery, and Pakuashipi, some of which reportedly are signed and one of which (Chevery) is in OSM. Everything I've seen in MTQ online data shows route numbers for those segments other than 00138, so I'm inclined to treat them as "future 138" at most. @yakra, do the most recent shapefiles say anything more?
Nothing more recent. Still working with data from 2016. :(
GeoBase seems to have slowed down big time on, if not forgotten entirely, updating the NRN shapefiles. NS & PE were updated in 2018; everything else...
(Maybe I gotta dig up a new link? I've tried occasionally, with little success...)

FWIW, the AARoads forum member whose post prompted my question, now is less convinced than his original post several years ago that there are additional QC 138 segments we should add (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=7954.msg2502676#msg2502676). So I would leave this alone for now.

BTW, he also notes that a connecting road under construction between the La Tabatiere and Tete-a-la-Baleine QC 138 segments will change their routing to bypass the towns in addition to merging the two segments. No change needed at this time.

=====

Other comments I agree with, except on the A-25/A-440/QC 125 interchange, which is giving me a headache and I'll curl back to it later.
Title: Re: canqc: Quebec Provincial Highways
Post by: yakra on May 27, 2020, 09:17:42 pm
MteeBaieST?
This sounds good.

I'll change 4 back to A-20(63).
This should stay 4, as it appears to be an "own-designation" exit number, following the adjacent 1 and 2.
Compare NY NY440 10 (http://travelmapping.net/hb/?r=ny.ny440&lat=40.612258&lon=-74.153810&zoom=15)

As for other examples, I'm scratching my head on that one.
Are you referring to when I said...?
Quote
Add a point in the middle of the rectangle bounded by Rue Notre-Dame Centre, Rue Saint-Georges, Rue Royale, Rue Saint-Roch -- leads to A-40 exit 199 and helps clarify the routing in the area a bit.
I'm suggesting adding a new point here (http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=46.340275&lon=-72.543502&zoom=15).

The one that comes to mind is QC 116 near Montreal, which has its own exit numbers, including on a segment concurrent with QC 112.
The QC116-based exits, with the plain numbers-only waypoint labels, are definitely fine.
As for the A-20 concurrency & its labels and how well that adheres to the letter of the manual, well... that's a discussion that can get deeply bogged down mighty quick. If those labels are questionable, then I've also flagged (http://forum.travelmapping.net/index.php?topic=3245.msg15696#msg15696) similarly questionable labels on MA140, and not changed them. I'm OK with walking away whistling casually (http://forum.travelmapping.net/index.php?topic=3245.msg15696#msg15696). :)

the A-25/A-440/QC 125 interchange, which is giving me a headache
Yup. :)
Title: Re: canqc: Quebec Provincial Highways
Post by: oscar on May 28, 2020, 06:19:00 pm
-- Any comments on how I dealt with the messy A-25/A-440/QC 125 interchange in Laval?
I made sure to have a look in the HDX before reading the rest of your thoughts, to see what solution I'd lean towards without any pre-bias.
Aye Caramba.

Moving the waypoint to the A-25/QC 125 intersection from the middle of the A-25/A-440 triangle better reflects that the interchange serves QC 125 and not just A-25 and A-440, with direct ramp connections from QC 125 to A-25.
My first thoughts were that this might lend itself to a 1PPI solution. The triangle, along with the QC125 at-grade junction thrown into the mix.

But I'm not sure about routing QC 125 via A-440(34),
What struck me was the angle of the final segment of A-440. Judging by a numbered Exit 34 being where it is (I'm not checking GMSV right now) it looks like A-440 heads south on the west leg, from the A-25 split at the N end of the triangle. The route trace looks awkward, but in a sense checks out in that A-440 continues to A-25, and that's where A-25's point is.

when northbound QC 125 traffic goes east of that point (southbound QC 125 traffic has to go through that point, to connect to the QC 125/A-440 concurrency).
Nonetheless I think 1PPI may be the cleanest -- a "correct by way of vagueness" -- solution here.
With the Masson/Marcel-Villeneuve intersection right on one edge of the central triangle, you could let this weight your judgment of where the triangle's center is.
I took the I-97@7 example to extremes, and considered where traffic would go if the thru lanes weren't available, if one were to exit & re-enter the highway. The inside-the-triangle, left-turn-ish movements would pass thru that intersection. The outside-the-triangle, right-turn-ish movements would be a little ways out on each leg.

There's another situation like this in TX, with a central ramp triangle, and a junction of at-grade routes right on one of its legs.
The main difference is there's not the added complication of a surface route joining/leaving a freeway via some funky ramps that QC has. (But there's still access between all the things because frontage roads.)
Here's how I handled it:
(http://yakra.teresco.org/images/14-35-190-317-436.png)
ISTR pondering whether to slide the point a bit more SSW, and could just as easily have done so.

One difference is, in the Texas example there appear to be no separately-numbered interchanges within that overall interchange, though there are 293A and 293B ramps. QC 440 has separate, signed 34 (Av. Marcel-Villenueve, etc.) and 35 (A-25 southbound -- thru lanes connect to A-25 northbound) interchanges, with 34 looking like an interchange-within-an-interchange. 34 covers connections between QC 125 and A-440, and WB A-440 from SB A-25. 35 covers connections from SB QC 125 to A-25, with a direct ramp to NB A-25 and the funky ramp to SB A-25, in addition to the connections to A-25 from EB A-440. Waypoint 35 (A-440/QC 125)/17 (A-25) is placed where QC 125 passes under A-25, and near the direct ramp from A-125 to NB A-25, which is also not a bad placement for the ramp triangle between A-25 and A-440.

This situation, ISTM, points to a 2PPI solution, if only to account for the two signed exit numbers 34 and 35 within the overall interchange.

I plan to pull in route file changes tonight that will implement your other comments not previously addressed, but no changes to the A-25/A-440/QC 125 complex. After they're all pulled in and I've double-checked them for NMP and Datacheck errors, I'll activate canqc tomorrow (quite by coincidence, the day I'm let out of my cage, as the stay-at-home order for northern Virginia expires).