Travel Mapping
Highway Data Discussion => Updates to Highway Data => Solved Highway data updates => Topic started by: rickmastfan67 on August 01, 2022, 09:52:55 pm
-
I-94_E -> 0
https://goo.gl/maps/n4TPESBhj12bfS2s9
Been posted as '0' since at least Aug '15.
===
23C -> I-55 ? This doesn't seem to have an exit number posted. https://goo.gl/maps/7EYeWRS3mMQw6CQFA
-
Similar to I-190, 0 already exists as an option. Unfortunately, in this case, it's on the opposite end of the tollway. It was treated as running W->E, and so "0" is at the NORTH end, rather than S->N. Changing the south end to 0 can be done but would mess up list files.
I-55 is a hidden/alt point label at 23B since that's where it crosses the mainline. It's held over from when the Tollway exits were not numbered. Although SB 294 to 55 is not 23C in the field, I think it makes the most sense for the situation.
-
Similar to I-190, 0 already exists as an option. Unfortunately, in this case, it's on the opposite end of the tollway. It was treated as running W->E, and so "0" is at the NORTH end, rather than S->N. Changing the south end to 0 can be done but would mess up list files.
Ooof, I didn't realize that. That does complicate things here. I might take a look at people list files who use '0' and see how many have it as a full clinch. If everybody does, then, swapping with '999' would not be an issue.
I-55 is a hidden/alt point label at 23B since that's where it crosses the mainline. It's held over from when the Tollway exits were not numbered. Although SB 294 to 55 is not 23C in the field, I think it makes the most sense for the situation.
Yeah, you're right. Hate inventing exit numbers, but this case does fully make sense. It's that or maybe making it 'ToI-55' instead.
-
Similar to I-190, 0 already exists as an option. Unfortunately, in this case, it's on the opposite end of the tollway. It was treated as running W->E, and so "0" is at the NORTH end, rather than S->N. Changing the south end to 0 can be done but would mess up list files.
Ooof, I didn't realize that. That does complicate things here. I might take a look at people list files who use '0' and see how many have it as a full clinch. If everybody does, then, swapping with '999' would not be an issue.
Ok, just did a search of the list files on GitHub, and I think we're in the clear for a 0 <-> 999 label swap. Only could find 3 people using either the 0 or 999 label (& all had the exact same line): IL I-294 0 999
They are as follows:
norheim (https://github.com/TravelMapping/UserData/blob/d15a57b5af8cda6fd264bd58c8e7abb545acfeeb/list_files/norheim.list#L340)
master_son (https://github.com/TravelMapping/UserData/blob/48241c90ed2a3e79258026f498164fef01baf4e3/list_files/master_son.list#L403)
paddy (https://github.com/TravelMapping/UserData/blob/7606b0adcb164415e74def206d76f3161cae3286/list_files/paddy.list#L47)
Nobody else was using the 0 or 999 labels in any other combination according to the search results.
So, yeah, I think we can safely swap those two labels, and unhide 0 @ I-80/I-94/IL-394 while keeping 999 hidden at the northern end. :) And not break anybody's list files at the same time. :D
-
Just saw the fixes pushed by Jim here (https://github.com/TravelMapping/HighwayData/commit/8443aeb6a83f887fb8f932aec87f34c8ffad1e6d#diff-b5e4a58cf4f79e18634c3208462f40fc0bbecfa7467a5e71952105cf2a9e97c6) and they look good for I-294.
So, marking this as solved.