Highway Data Discussion > In-progress Highway Systems & Work
Japan: National Highways 一般国道 system
nezinscot:
I'll follow your advice about using devel-only systems to split up the work.
I think jpnh should be the system name for the national highways.
Devel-only systems can be used for each island, or island section for Honshu. They can be swept into jpnh as they are completed.
jpnhky - Kyushu and Okinawa
jpnhsh - Shikoku
jpnhhk - Hokkaido
jpnhkt - Kanto (east Honshu / Tokyo)
jpnhks - Kansai (west Honshu / Osaka)
I was thinking that jpnh would be type 3, but I see that US national highways are type 2. Would type 3 be the better choice? Japan already has systems for type 1 and 2.
michih:
--- Quote from: nezinscot on September 20, 2021, 12:21:23 pm ---I was thinking that jpnh would be type 3, but I see that US national highways are type 2. Would type 3 be the better choice? Japan already has systems for type 1 and 2.
--- End quote ---
It should be tier 4 like the other national highway systems in Asia (and Europe) but the Indian one is tier 3 - likely a mistake.
michih:
Just a note on N295:
https://travelmapping.net/hb/showroute.php?r=jpn.n295
https://travelmapping.net/hb/showroute.php?r=jpn.e065
- E51/E65 must be a one-point-per-interchange with E65's N295 wp
- E51/E65 might even be a one-point-per-interchange with E65's exit 10 + N295 wp
- E51/E65 does not (directly) connect to E51. Wp should be called E65_something
- NarApt must be a one-pont-per-interchange with E65! I tend to adding a wp to E65 at NarApt location.
yakra:
N481
While deep into some shell scripting, I found E71(4)/P29 which led me here.
This would want to have either the E71(4) or the P29, but both isn't really something we do.
--- Quote from: https://travelmapping.net/devel/manual/wayptlabels.php#parens ---Avoid using two designations and a parenthetical suffix in the same label.
--- End quote ---
For the coordinates, I'd recommend moving the point in E71's file to match.
Back to the label, what to do here... I guess I'd recommend E71(4), as this is where the multiplex would end anyway if Exit 3 weren't right up in the mix being all confusing. It fits in with with E71(5) and E71(3).
Reposition E71(3) to sync up with the point on E71 and get concurrency detection working.
E71(5) is fine.
E71(2):
Wow. This is like some of the crazier parts of urban Texas. I don't envy you having to sort this out right when joining the project.
When plotting out points on these complex frontage road systems, I find it helps to ask where the points would fall if the frontage roads weren't in the picture, if the connections were made via traditional diamond ramps or equivalents.
On freeways/expressways, this usually results in point placement at a major central crossroad (often at another route in the HB if there is one) for diamond equivalents.
Half-diamond equivalents will usually be the first crossroad. The first one with a bridge, unless such is really far away. If there are multiple grade-separated crossroads close together where the ramps touch down, and a major route (also in the HB) isn't the very first one, I might still pick that sometimes, and get a graph connection.
Thus IMO JPN E71 2 is placed appropriately, centered at N26.
So E71(2) and N26, we'd want to collapse into One Point Per Interchange. Putting it at the same coords as on E71 will give a graph connection with E71 now; I presume N26 will be drafted in the future. Right now N481's file has more precicse coordinates, so I'd recommend replacing the coords in E71's file with those.
As for whether to name this point E71(2) or N26, I'm agnostic; won't push for one over the other. This reminds me of TX US183 at TX21, though I won't necessarily say what I did there is The Right Thing To Do.
nezinscot:
Thank you both for the reviews.
I have mostly followed your advice and have modified both the national highways and the national expressways. Here are the changes I plan to submit. I'm not convinced what I did with E51(10) on N295 is right, but I wanted to include the connection to E51.
https://github.com/TravelMapping/HighwayData/compare/master...denishanson:master
Should I be the one to make the changes to the E65 and E71?
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version