Recent Posts

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 10
21
Updates to Highway Data / Re: OR point labels
« Last post by si404 on Yesterday at 03:16:43 pm »
If US101 and US6 were there, that would be US6/101, so no confusion there as I see it.
True. It's never sat right with me to have such labelling though - what if it was US1/6 with the 6 route being a state route?

Bickendan, like me, seems to prefer making any lettered prefix explicit, hence why I was reminding him of that option.
22
In-progress Highway Systems & Work / Re: canqc (Quebec Provincial Highways)
« Last post by oscar on Yesterday at 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.
23
Updates to Highway Data / AB43X opens
« Last post by yakra on Yesterday at 02:09:52 pm »
https://www.mygrandeprairienow.com/61640/highway-43x-bypass-officially-opens-to-traffic/

The article includes a photo of a suffixless AB43 shield on the bypass:

A photo taken at the roundabout facing east (Michael Lumsden MyGrandePrairieNow.com staff)

No big surprise on that, with the 'X' suffix often denoting a planned realignment.

TBD: what happens to the old alignment thru town

In theory I could move AB43 now, and change any other routes later once that info becomes clear. But I'll wait on this for a bit.
24
In-progress Highway Systems & Work / Re: canqc (Quebec Provincial Highways)
« Last post by vdeane on Yesterday at 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).
25
Updates to Highway Data / Re: OR point labels
« Last post by yakra on Yesterday at 01:55:49 pm »
US101 (and no mention of OR6) is an acceptable label too. Dealing with the issue of making it look as if US101 and US6 are there.
If US101 and US6 were there, that would be US6/101, so no confusion there as I see it.
But yes, plain US101 is also acceptable.
26
Perhaps there could be a "drawing style" drop-down menu with a few options:
-Full (as it is now)
-Full Inverse (michih's idea, everything but with inverted opacity)
-Clinched Only (clinched segments as now, no unclinched segments)
-Unclinched Only (no clinched segments, unclinched segments more opaque than in Full but not as opaque as clinched segments in Full or Clinched Only)
27
Updates to Highway Data / NS 101 realignment, Marshalltown
« Last post by yakra on Yesterday at 01:21:46 pm »
https://www.annapoliscountyspectator.ca/news/provincial/241-million-highway-project-in-digby-county-opened-to-traffic-346749/
New alignment of NS101 between Exit 26 and Middle Cross Rd opened Aug 28.

center WPTedit here
Code: [Select]
26 http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=44.597164&lon=-65.771220
+x26a http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=44.598871&lon=-65.785875
+x26b http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=44.597099&lon=-65.798492
NS1 http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=44.583529&lon=-65.811110
MidCroRd http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=44.581748&lon=-65.812271

This video shows that NS1 is signed:
• Westward along the bypassed alignment
• Eastward concurrent with NS101 (!)
This means extending NS1Smi west, rather than adding a new NS1 segment.

https://github.com/TravelMapping/HighwayData/pull/3172
28
Updates to Highway Data / Re: OR point labels
« Last post by michih on Yesterday at 12:43:40 pm »
US20: US26 -> US26_W
US26: US20 -> US20_W

I agree and think that it's not a suggestion but the only way to go.

OR131: US101/OR6 -> US101/6

I'm not sure how this is threated in US but I'd prefer just US101 without OR6 since US route is a "higher" (tier) system.
29
Updates to Highway Data / Re: OR point labels
« Last post by si404 on Yesterday at 12:37:32 pm »
Of these, only one that really merits attention is the OR 131 one, with me noting I prefer the full label as currently stands. But, for consistency, I'll fix it to US101/6.
US101 (and no mention of OR6) is an acceptable label too. Dealing with the issue of making it look as if US101 and US6 are there.
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 10