Highway Data Discussion > In-progress Highway Systems & Work
cannl:Newfoundland & Labrador Provincial Highways
yakra:
b071cc0 & 1940ab5:
Deletions & labels.
Left in some points that aren't strictly necessary for shaping/distance, but serve decent-sized communities, e.g. SunDr & OldEddRd. OTOH, I zapped some stuff like BarHarRd & SavCove_S.
Discuss.
--- Quote from: yakra on October 02, 2019, 02:55:47 am ---Road names are hard to come by in NL; I'll take what I can get.
I don't suppose you found an official source to work from? I never did.
--- End quote ---
The 3 places I'll most commonly look, OSM, shapefiles and street blade signs, will frequently have no names. Contradictions between sources are fairly common.
--- Quote from: yakra on October 02, 2019, 02:55:47 am ---3miRock replaced with ThrMileRock. Incidentally, these "Loop Road"s that I see in OSM seem suspect, and I can't corroborate in other sources. Sticking with a truncated place name.
--- End quote ---
Rethinking this a bit...
[*] Near ForPt, many of the local roads do have names in OSM. Maybe we can assume whoever was editing OSM was on to something, had access to good info, and got stuff right.
[*] In the case of MainSt_Cow & SunDr, no other nearby roads are labeled in OSM. Main St & Sunset Dr come from the shapefiles, and are backed up by Google & Bing. GMSV in the area does not confirm Main St & Sunset Dr specifically, but does match street names as shown in Google & shapefiles.
[*] Meanwhile, at Anchor Point, Loop Road is confirmed in the shapefiles, so AncPt_S and AncPt_N get renamed.
[*] Here, however, OSM has a second "Loop Road", which is Crescent Street per the shapefiles. Pretty solid evidence of bad OSM info here.
(OTOH, shapefiles can be wrong too. Percy's Lane?
The question becomes, how much trust do we put in OSM's road names (particularly with common items such as Main Rd or Loop Rd) in the absence of any other data to confirm or refute? Do we just take OSM as gospel until something else comes along to contradict it?
Pending the answer to this, I've gone no-build on a few point labels for the time being:
ThrMileRock could become LoopRd_Thr (?)
PorCre could become MainRd_Por
ForPt could become... LoopRd_StB, or LoopRd_For...
GreIslCove_W & GreIslCove_E could become MainRd_S & MainRd_N
GreIslBro could become MainRd_Gre
Truncated place name:
Perhaps MisCove could become MainSt_Mis, if this is close enough to call it.
Mistaken Cove is our truncated nearby town name, which seems to override using a truncated distant town name.
si404:
--- Quote from: yakra on September 28, 2019, 07:14:15 pm ---No pull request yet, pending potential discussion.
--- End quote ---
This all seems fine.
--- Quote ---NL330: WhiWatPondRd -> WWPondRd (What's the source for this name? OSM has just "Gull Pond" with no generic road type; ESRI, Google & Shapefiles have no name.)
--- End quote ---
Typically Mapquest or Bing or some other tile mapping we don't have now. This goes for any label that isn't OSM (in any system michih!) - go through the tile mapping to see if there is one. Then try GMSV.
This one, however, is just wrong. What I've done is take the name of the track at the shaping point to the west and then relabeled the wrong point with that name!
--- Quote from: yakra on October 02, 2019, 02:55:47 am ---Should CarAccRd be HowAve?
--- End quote ---
Yes. I think what has happened is that OSM has found out the proper (rather than the informed-guess descriptive name either them or I made up) name since drafting.
--- Quote from: yakra on October 03, 2019, 09:01:50 pm ---The question becomes, how much trust do we put in OSM's road names (particularly with common items such as Main Rd or Loop Rd) in the absence of any other data to confirm or refute? Do we just take OSM as gospel until something else comes along to contradict it?
--- End quote ---
In the absence of other data, I guess go with it, as it is actually some data - as you said "Road names are hard to come by in NL; I'll take what I can get." - which is better than nothing.
But at the same time, OSM isn't the most reliable source, and so contradictions may refute it. Add in that all the sources seem to conflict (go with blades, then shapefiles, then OSM in a most-to-least reliable) and it's a mess :pan:
--- Quote ---Truncated place name:
Perhaps MisCove could become MainSt_Mis, if this is close enough to call it.
--- End quote ---
Isn't that referring to the road into Flower's Cove off the road that loops off NL430?
yakra:
Green items are in 51ba293.
--- Quote from: si404 on October 17, 2019, 09:31:35 am ---
--- Quote from: yakra on September 28, 2019, 07:14:15 pm ---No pull request yet, pending potential discussion.
--- End quote ---
This all seems fine.
--- End quote ---
Just the one commit I'd linked just before that comment, or also the other commits downthread, everything in my NL branch?
--- Quote from: si404 on October 17, 2019, 09:31:35 am ---
--- Quote ---NL330: WhiWatPondRd -> WWPondRd (What's the source for this name? OSM has just "Gull Pond" with no generic road type; ESRI, Google & Shapefiles have no name.
--- End quote ---
Typically Mapquest or Bing or some other tile mapping we don't have now. This goes for any label that isn't OSM (in any system michih!) - go through the tile mapping to see if there is one. Then try GMSV.
--- End quote ---
Yep. That's about the same approach I'm taking here. ("Take what I can get", n'at.) Except giving blade signs in GMSV higher priority, as you noted elsewhere.
--- Quote from: si404 on October 17, 2019, 09:31:35 am ---This one, however, is just wrong. What I've done is take the name of the track at the shaping point to the west and then relabeled the wrong point with that name!
--- End quote ---
Aah yes, I see that now. Changed to plain GullPond (with no generic road type), lacking anything more concrete. Made the shaping point visible, as the new WWPondRd.
--- Quote from: si404 on October 17, 2019, 09:31:35 am ---
--- Quote from: yakra on October 02, 2019, 02:55:47 am ---Should CarAccRd be HowAve?
--- End quote ---
Yes.
--- End quote ---
Changed in NL330 & NL332.
--- Quote from: si404 on October 17, 2019, 09:31:35 am ---I think what has happened is that OSM has found out the proper (rather than the informed-guess descriptive name either them or I made up) name since drafting.
--- End quote ---
My suspicion is that there are a lot of these informed-guess descriptive names about on OSM, particularly with Main Rd & Loop Rd.
--- Quote from: si404 on October 17, 2019, 09:31:35 am ---
--- Quote from: yakra on October 03, 2019, 09:01:50 pm ---The question becomes, how much trust do we put in OSM's road names (particularly with common items such as Main Rd or Loop Rd) in the absence of any other data to confirm or refute? Do we just take OSM as gospel until something else comes along to contradict it?
--- End quote ---
In the absence of other data, I guess go with it, as it is actually some data - as you said "Road names are hard to come by in NL; I'll take what I can get." - which is better than nothing.
--- End quote ---
My thoughts too. I'll review the items I noted in red above, and make a decision.
--- Quote from: si404 on October 17, 2019, 09:31:35 am ---But at the same time, OSM isn't the most reliable source, and so contradictions may refute it. Add in that all the sources seem to conflict (go with blades, then shapefiles, then OSM in a most-to-least reliable) and it's a mess :pan:
--- End quote ---
A good way to prioritize reliability, yes. With the caveat that OSM can be a bit more wibbly-wobbly if/when it disagrees with other sources.
--- Quote ---Perhaps MisCove could become MainSt_Mis, if this is close enough to call it.
--- End quote ---
--- Quote from: si404 on October 17, 2019, 09:31:35 am ---Isn't that referring to the road into Flower's Cove off the road that loops off NL430?
--- End quote ---
Looking at the link again, at the angle of the blade sign, it looks like it's facing traffic (yeah, it's on the same post as the stop sign) stopped on that road, identifying the parallel (to the sign) main road.
OTOH, over here it's signed as Grenfell Ave. So even if it is Main St at point A, it's Grenfell Ave at point B.
I don't have a good handle on what separates one community from another in NL, or where road names will change. If the name can change in that short distance, I no longer feel confident proposing MainSt_Mis; it's a bit of a stretch.
Having a signed road name here, I'll just add a GreAve point, and remove MisCove as it's no longer needed for shaping, sidestepping the truncated place name issue.
Coords from the shapefiles are a we bit off the OSM trace, but match ESRI WorldStreetMap and Goog Satellite.
si404:
--- Quote from: yakra on October 17, 2019, 12:41:41 pm ---Just the one commit I'd linked just before that comment, or also the other commits downthread, everything in my NL branch
--- End quote ---
At the time I wrote it, just that commit. At the time I write this, all the other commits too!
yakra:
4ffe377:
On "In the absence of other data, go with OSM" grounds, the following all get implemented:
--- Quote from: yakra on October 03, 2019, 09:01:50 pm ---ThrMileRock could become LoopRd_Thr (?)
PorCre could become MainRd_Por
ForPt could become... LoopRd_StB, or LoopRd_For...
GreIslCove_W & GreIslCove_E could become MainRd_S & MainRd_N
GreIslBro could become MainRd_Gre
--- End quote ---
ForPt becomes LoopRd_For.
MainRd_S & MainRd_N on "The direction letter refers to the relative position of the intersection along the route whose file is being made. US90_S is the southern of the two US 90 junctions along US 25, which runs S-N" grounds.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[*] Previous page
Go to full version