Recent Posts

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10
1
I started in the north and Fv6xx - Fv8xx are already done. There are some new routes and other routes have been downgraded. Also some primary routes (Rv) have been changed to Fv or even to E numbering. The latter are the short branches to airports in the very north of Norway.

I think that about 50% of the norfv routes are done now. The south will be more difficult due to more concurrent routes, e.g. the freeways from eursf system.
I usually tried to add alt labels for the Fv routes so far but I cannot promise for the south.
2
Now the great debate for those of us who have driven through that area but not on the realignment... ignore it (it's only 350 feet away at the furthest), leave it in our .list files but make a note to re-clinch, or remove it from our .list files.  I'm inclined to just ignore it right now, but this seems to have been significant enough to have had points added at either end, and I've been known to ignore things and then get more anal about them later.
3
beln.csv:
beln;BEL;N712;Pel;Pelt;;bel.n712pel;
->
beln;BEL;N712;;Pel;Pelt;bel.n712pel;

How did you catch this? Is there a data error (data check output?) I didn't notice?
If not.... I think it should be a data error: abbrev entry exists but the city entry is missing.
4
In-progress Highway Systems & Work / Re: frad: France Routes Départementales
« Last post by Jim on Yesterday at 04:11:31 pm »
I don't have much concern about the length as far as the DB tables.  Those are small tables and if we made them 100 or 128 characters, it's nothing in the big picture.  I think our concern here is what is useful to TM users and looks reasonable in the places this information is displayed on the web front end.
5
In-progress Highway Systems & Work / Re: frad: France Routes Départementales
« Last post by michih on Yesterday at 11:22:20 am »
To be defined:
4. One system per region (13 systems in total) as I've done for FRA-IDF or one system per departement (almost 100 systems) as I did for FRA-GES?

I'm in favor of system per departement and would split fraidfd if there is no objection.

Pros:
- Easier to draft and bringing to preview
- Easier to peer-review and active (e.g. FRA-GES has the Alsace issue, two departements should be merged in 2021, road numbering unknown, not likely be be activated before 2022/23)
- Easier to clinch by travelers, better to set travel goals and achieve them

Cons:
- High number of TM systems (currently about 330 w/o France, 430 with France one day)

There's one database-buster in there already, and to fit "Bourgogne-Franche-Comté Routes Départementales (Territoire de Belfort)", we'd need to expand the width of the systemName field by a full 20%.

Bourgogne-Franche-Comté Routes Départementales (Territoire de Belfort) [71 characters]

A) "Bourgogne-Franche-Comté Routes Départementales" [47 characters]
B) "Territoire de Belfort Routes Départementales" [44 characters]

It was planned to change the names when we agreed on the system definition.
I prefer option B.
6
Welcome & Notices / Re: TM data, logs, stats, etc. archives
« Last post by yakra on Yesterday at 04:42:00 am »
Saved for each site update are the .sql file used to populate the DB, and the contents of the graphdata, lots, nmp_merged, and stats directories.
This just came in handy, as it turns out. I just grabbed one of the .sql files from when this issue was live, and installed it on lab2. It seems MySQL 5.7 & MySQL 8.0 differ in some pretty significant ways on how they handle multi-byte characters and over-length fields.

7
In-progress Highway Systems & Work / Re: frad: France Routes Départementales
« Last post by si404 on Yesterday at 04:26:03 am »
Shorter names would be better, I'd think, and the administrative region's name isn't important with several departmental systems in the same one; it gets in the way. Wouldn't it make more sense to simplify the names & just name them after the department, E.G. Territoire de Belfort Routes Départementales?
Concur.
8
In-progress Highway Systems & Work / Re: frad: France Routes Départementales
« Last post by yakra on Yesterday at 12:04:12 am »
I had a look at the system names, and many of them seem a bit dubious, overly long:
yakra@BiggaTomato:~/TravelMapping/HighwayData$ cat systems.csv | cut -f3 -d';' | grep 'Routes Départementales' | grep '(.*)$'
Grand-Est Routes Départementales (Aube)
Grand-Est Routes Départementales (Haute-Marne)
Grand-Est Routes Départementales (Meurthe-et-Moselle)
Grand-Est Routes Départementales (Meuse)
Grand-Est Routes Départementales (Moselle)
Grand-Est Routes Départementales (Vosges)
Hauts-de-France Routes Départementales (Somme)
Île-de-France Routes Départementales (Seine-et-Marne)
Île-de-France Routes Départementales (Yvelines)
Île-de-France Routes Départementales (Essonne)
Île-de-France Routes Départementales (Hauts-de-Seine)
Île-de-France Routes Départementales (Seine-Saint-Denis)
Île-de-France Routes Départementales (Val-de-Marne)
Île-de-France Routes Départementales (Val-d'Oise)
Normandy Routes Départementales (Seine-Maritime)
Auvergne-Rhône-Alpes Routes Départementales (Allier)
Auvergne-Rhône-Alpes Routes Départementales (Ardèche)
Auvergne-Rhône-Alpes Routes Départementales (Cantal)
Auvergne-Rhône-Alpes Routes Départementales (Drôme)
Auvergne-Rhône-Alpes Routes Départementales (Isère)
Auvergne-Rhône-Alpes Routes Départementales (Loire)
Auvergne-Rhône-Alpes Routes Départementales (Haute-Loire)
Auvergne-Rhône-Alpes Routes Départementales (Puy-de-Dôme)
Auvergne-Rhône-Alpes Routes Départementales (Rhône)
Auvergne-Rhône-Alpes Routes Départementales (Savoie)
Auvergne-Rhône-Alpes Routes Départementales (Haute-Savoie)
Bourgogne-Franche-Comté Routes Départementales (Côte-d’Or)
Bourgogne-Franche-Comté Routes Départementales (Doubs)
Bourgogne-Franche-Comté Routes Départementales (Jura)
Bourgogne-Franche-Comté Routes Départementales (Nièvre)
Bourgogne-Franche-Comté Routes Départementales (Haute-Saône)
Bourgogne-Franche-Comté Routes Départementales (Saône-et-Loire)
Bourgogne-Franche-Comté Routes Départementales (Yonne)
Bourgogne-Franche-Comté Routes Départementales (Territoire de Belfort)
Grand-Est Routes Départementales (Ardennes)
Grand-Est Routes Départementales (Marne)
Grand-Est Routes Départementales (Alsace)
Hauts-de-France Routes Départementales (Aisne)
Hauts-de-France Routes Départementales (Nord)
Hauts-de-France Routes Départementales (Oise)
Hauts-de-France Routes Départementales (Pas-de-Calais)
Normandy Routes Départementales (Calvados)
Normandy Routes Départementales (Eure)
Normandy Routes Départementales (Manche)
Normandy Routes Départementales (Orne)

There's one database-buster in there already, and to fit "Bourgogne-Franche-Comté Routes Départementales (Territoire de Belfort)", we'd need to expand the width of the systemName field by a full 20%.
Shorter names would be better, I'd think, and the administrative region's name isn't important with several departmental systems in the same one; it gets in the way. Wouldn't it make more sense to simplify the names & just name them after the department, E.G. Territoire de Belfort Routes Départementales?
9
In-progress Highway Systems & Work / Re: gbnb: Great Britain B Roads
« Last post by michih on April 03, 2020, 02:49:39 pm »
B4208:
Split A438 into 2 wps
Definite overlap!

Fine to me if you don't wanna split it but.... I think it's not overlapping ;)





Quote
B4208:
PeaRd -> PicRd_N
??? Not only is the road Peach Road, but PicRd_N is another point, so this would be a duplicate label. Was there something about these two points that wasn't rename one as the other?

I really don't get what I made here....  :pan:
10
In-progress Highway Systems & Work / Re: gbnb: Great Britain B Roads
« Last post by si404 on April 03, 2020, 02:30:22 pm »
B4208:
Split A438 into 2 wps
Definite overlap!
Quote
B4208:
PeaRd -> PicRd_N
??? Not only is the road Peach Road, but PicRd_N is another point, so this would be a duplicate label. Was there something about these two points that wasn't rename one as the other?
Quote
B4232:
Replace eastern end point B4503 by wp at A449 south of the church. Confirmed by OSM, GM and GSV
GM has the segment you suggest (correctly) marked as B4219 - so actually it confirms what I have, not your change. I spent some time sorting that area out when drafting as signage is confusing. The one GSV sign (pointing to the main bit of B4232) is not only old, but directly contradicts the data the authority that erected it has on what road is which - I'm going to suggest they put the wrong road in brackets, which would be a fairly simple mistake for a signmaker to make.
Quote
B4289old:
Merge into main route? It's just a short concurrency with A4289
Any other A road, sure. However it's a single numbered route (forming a box around Swindon) that changes what system it's part of. cf things like Ax(M) breaking up Ax routes, but with more certainty as an argument can be made that they are part of the A road, whereas the A4289 is explicitly not B4289.
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10