Travel Mapping
Highway Data Discussion => In-progress Highway Systems & Work => Topic started by: michih on September 03, 2022, 10:41:37 am
-
The preview system has more than 80 routes for almost 700 miles: https://travelmapping.net/user/system.php?u=michih&sys=autl4
The system is ready for peer-reviewing. Please report issues here!
Additional info can be found under: https://forum.travelmapping.net/index.php?topic=1776.msg28949#msg28949
Route list and map: https://www.land-oberoesterreich.gv.at/37083.htm
Edit: Title changed to include "Landesstraßen 2. Ordnung"
-
General questions
- about border points: You've gone with the lower level Bezirke names, rather than the Länder, but these are Länder systems, so shouldn't the border labels be Länder-based, rather than Bezirke-based? I guess it's awkward as you'd have AT4/AT5 format if you go with ISO-3166-2, but Obe/Sal formats would work (Obe for Oberösterreich) as O/N, O/S (or O/Sbg) is not great.
- do numbers duplicate between these Landesstraßen systems? They don't in the two signed systems we have in the browser, so do we need the banners (which, if needed, probably ought to be something less obscure than the ISO numbers: 'O' and 'T'?)
L501 - add point for Uberackern?
L502 - B148 is off
L503, L504, L505 - fine
L506 - add point for L1147_S (and L1147 -> L1147_N)
L507, L508, L509, L509a, L510, L511, L512, L513, L513Rie, L514, L515, L516, L517, L518, L519, L520, L521, L522, L525, L528, L529, L531, L532, L533, L534, L536, L537, L538, L539, L540, L541, L541a, L543, L544, L545, L546, L547, L548, L549, L550, L551, L552, L553, L554, L555, L556, L557, L558, L559 - fine
L559Hau - is two segements, Hausmann:
Obe/Nie http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=48.012093&lon=14.488942
Nie/Obe http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=48.009004&lon=14.492021
and Kleinraming:
Obe/Nie http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=48.005145&lon=14.493397
Nie/Obe http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=47.997173&lon=14.497511
L559Ste, L559Win, L560, L561 - fine
L562 - B138 should be _N/_S no?
L563 - add points for Pucking and Freindorf?
L563a, L564, L565 - fine
L566
- L1394 -> L1349/L1394
- A1 is slightly off (also E60)
L567 - fine
L568 - L1402 -> L1402/L1403
L569 - B3_Ste, B3_Pul would directional suffixes be better to show concurrency?
L570 - Dir -> MacStr_W
L571, L572, L573, L575, L576, L579 - fine
L581 - add point at north end of SamStr?
L584 - L1528 -> L1528/L1531
L585, L587, L588 - fine
L589 - L1552 -> L1552/L1558
L590 - fine
Edit: Lander abbrevs
-
There's some abbreviations for Lander on German wikipedia (https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Land_(%C3%96sterreich))
English German Abbrev ISO-3166-2
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Burgenland Burgenland B / Bgld. AT1
Carinthia Kärnten K / Ktn. AT2
Lower Austria Niederösterreich N / NÖ AT3
Upper Austria Oberösterreich O / OÖ AT4
Salzburg Salzburg S / Sbg. AT5
Styria Steiermark St / Stmk. AT6
Tyrol Tirol T AT7
Vorarlberg Vorarlberg V / Vbg. AT8
Vienna Wien W AT9
-
General questions
- about border points: You've gone with the lower level Bezirke names, rather than the Länder, but these are Länder systems, so shouldn't the border labels be Länder-based, rather than Bezirke-based? I guess it's awkward as you'd have AT4/AT5 format if you go with ISO-3166-2, but Obe/Sal formats would work (Obe for Oberösterreich) as O/N, O/S (or O/Sbg) is not great.
The road list of Tyrol (https://www.ris.bka.gv.at/GeltendeFassung.wxe?Abfrage=LrT&Gesetzesnummer=20000250) has them listed by Bezirk (district) and the very first "border" occurance on drafting was a district border where the road number changed. Was it the one Chris recently mentioned (last pic)? (https://www.skyscrapercity.com/threads/477567/post-180344264) Thus, I thought I should always use district names to be consistently.
- do numbers duplicate between these Landesstraßen systems?
Yes, e.g. L47 exists in Vorarlberg, Carinthia and Lower Austria.
They don't in the two signed systems we have in the browser, so do we need the banners (which, if needed, probably ought to be something less obscure than the ISO numbers: 'O' and 'T'?)
I want to apply the same rules as we implement all over the world, and stick with ISO codes.
-
Rest is implemented: https://github.com/TravelMapping/HighwayData/pull/6027
-
<snip>
All fine
There's no datacheck errors, and the few NMPs (https://courses.teresco.org/metal/hdx/?load=aut.nmp) seem to be false positives.
Have a look tomorrow, and make sure it's all OK, though the changes look absolutely fine, and it should be fine to activate (and I'm not delaying you so you don't get to trigger the milestones you point out in the statistics thread - you can do it tonight if you want).
-
System will be activated with the next site update: https://github.com/TravelMapping/HighwayData/pull/6081
-
Sounds reasonable. Have you checked that the 4-digit roads in Upper Austria are signed too?
Soooo I'm looking and looking and I can't even find a sign for a 3-digit Landesstraßen in Upper Austria.
So okay let's worry about Salzburg for now. We know they have signs!
-
Sounds reasonable. Have you checked that the 4-digit roads in Upper Austria are signed too?
Soooo I'm looking and looking and I can't even find a sign for a 3-digit Landesstraßen in Upper Austria.
Only on km post. Examples from my 2022 research before GSV was available: L531 (https://www.mapillary.com/app/?lat=48.220689135191&lng=14.030715518182&z=17.011668276978646&mapStyle=OpenStreetMap&pKey=284134143405823&focus=photo&x=0.6805961080646866&y=0.6465178027957843&zoom=3) + L506 (https://www.mapillary.com/app/?lat=48.480997372725&lng=13.456520601251&z=17.000389888323994&mapStyle=OpenStreetMap&pKey=1184009045392884&focus=photo&x=0.5267085462208346&y=0.6123269691180271&zoom=3) (low quality images though).
-
Just a quick check on GSV:
- L501 (https://maps.app.goo.gl/PKnwMKodunFFTHVPA) (1. Ordnung, in HB)
- L1024 (https://maps.app.goo.gl/xSST3Byc7ySw1bY66) (2. Ordnung, not yet in HB)
-
Sounds reasonable. Have you checked that the 4-digit roads in Upper Austria are signed too?
Soooo I'm looking and looking and I can't even find a sign for a 3-digit Landesstraßen in Upper Austria.
@Duke87, what do you think now? Should I add the 4-digit routes?
-
@Duke87, what do you think now? Should I add the 4-digit routes?
Precedent from this side of the pond is that a route whose number appears on milemarkers and only on milemarkers does not count as "signed". Going by that I don't even think the 3-digit ones belong in TM.
Buuut I also know we're far looser about requiring things be signed in continental Europe, and deleting an active system seems silly.
So IDK. Leave it as is and move on I guess.
-
Precedent from this side of the pond is that a route whose number appears on milemarkers and only on milemarkers does not count as "signed". Going by that I don't even think the 3-digit ones belong in TM.
German state road* numbers do also only** appear on km posts just as Tyrol and Styria. We agreed back then, that it's enough. To be honest, I did could not even check for km posts due to the non-existing GSV coverage back then. I'm generally gone with official data + OSM + GM all over Europe***. I think that we do have systems in Africa and Asia which are even "less signed". I don't have an issue with that.
*14 active systems
**I've actually seen about five S road numbers on direction signs in Saxony by myself though.
***Most of my European countries are really very good in signposting so that we can easily trust them in combination with OSM.
I think that we have precedent from Salzburg for including "Landesstraßen 2. Ordnung" to the tier 5 "Landesstraßen" system. I'd add them.
Edit: Adding "+ OSM + GM"
-
I've started drafting the 4-digit routes as a temporary system so that it can be reviewed later: https://travelmapping.net/hb/index.php?sys=autl42 I'll merge the systems on activation.
-
The new 2. Ordnung system has more than 450 routes for almost 1,800 miles: https://travelmapping.net/user/system.php?u=michih&sys=autl42
The system is ready for peer-reviewing. It will be merged with the active 1. Ordnung system on its activation.