Travel Mapping

Highway Data Discussion => Updates to Highway Data => Solved Highway data updates => Topic started by: Markkos1992 on March 11, 2019, 08:08:11 pm

Title: OH: I-76 60 label at south end of Ohio Turnpike Interchange
Post by: Markkos1992 on March 11, 2019, 08:08:11 pm
Should this be 218A to match I-80 or be something else entirely?  I could not see any signs of an Exit 60 on I-76 EB in GSV (https://www.google.com/maps/@41.1071114,-80.8682477,3a,75y,77.25h,86.62t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1swtYPmFYq-SyuZNOXp5OX9A!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo0.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DwtYPmFYq-SyuZNOXp5OX9A%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D37.314095%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i13312!8i6656) leading up to this area.
Title: Re: OH: I-76 60 label at south end of Ohio Turnpike Interchange
Post by: mapcat on March 13, 2019, 02:16:57 pm
The interchange there was unnecessarily complicated (due to ramps between the toll plaza and Mahoning Ave). To simplify, I used the examples of Turnpike exit 161 (with ramps to both I-71 & US 42) and Turnpike exit 173 (with ramps to both I-77 and OH 21) and deleted the extra point for Mahoning Ave. The 218 point for both I-76 and I-80 has been moved to the point where the centerlines cross, and 60/218A have been made alt labels for 218.

The Turnpike needs some more work at the other interchanges, most of which lack graph connections, but that's a project for another day.

https://github.com/TravelMapping/HighwayData/pull/2660 (https://github.com/TravelMapping/HighwayData/pull/2660)
Title: Re: OH: I-76 60 label at south end of Ohio Turnpike Interchange
Post by: Markkos1992 on March 13, 2019, 04:12:21 pm
I was planning to look at the rest of the Ohio Turnpike within the next few days.  I can type up a list in a separate topic of ones that may need graph connections.

Otherwise, I agree with what you did here.
Title: Re: OH: I-76 60 label at south end of Ohio Turnpike Interchange
Post by: yakra on March 13, 2019, 07:01:59 pm
The lack of graph connections is going to be a natural consequence of the trumpet interchanges, though.
Title: Re: OH: I-76 60 label at south end of Ohio Turnpike Interchange
Post by: Jim on March 13, 2019, 07:40:10 pm
As much as I'd like to fix graph connections, there are many places on toll roads most commonly where it just makes sense to have separate points.

I thought I had a topic about this somewhere here or in a GitHub issue, but I'm not finding it.  The idea in the back of my mind for a few years now is to introduce a new (likely non-clinchable, but eventually preview- or active-level so it would get into graph generation) system to provide the segments that would turn into the missing edges.  The case closest to home for me is NY I-90's 27(NYST) and NY NY30's I-90, which would be connected by an edge that essentially represents the ramp.

A sample ny.nyexit27ramp.wpt (or something like that) file might look like this:

Code: [Select]
NY30 http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=42.926807&lon=-74.199686
I-90 http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=42.922932&lon=-74.196424
Title: Re: OH: I-76 60 label at south end of Ohio Turnpike Interchange
Post by: mapcat on March 13, 2019, 07:41:33 pm
I was planning to look at the rest of the Ohio Turnpike within the next few days.  I can type up a list in a separate topic of ones that may need graph connections.

Thanks for the offer, but I will do this sometime later this spring.

The lack of graph connections is going to be a natural consequence of the trumpet interchanges, though.

There are a lot of locations where separating the points isn't necessary. Most of these trumpet interchanges connect only two routes.

As much as I'd like to fix graph connections, there are many places on toll roads most commonly where it just makes sense to have separate points.

I thought I had a topic about this somewhere here or in a GitHub issue, but I'm not finding it.  The idea in the back of my mind for a few years now is to introduce a new (likely non-clinchable, but eventually preview- or active-level so it would get into graph generation) system to provide the segments that would turn into the missing edges.  The case closest to home for me is NY I-90's 27(NYST) and NY NY30's I-90, which would be connected by an edge that essentially represents the ramp.

A sample ny.nyexit27ramp.wpt (or something like that) file might look like this:

Code: [Select]
NY30 http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=42.926807&lon=-74.199686
I-90 http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=42.922932&lon=-74.196424

An additional system of connectors between routes without current graph connections seems like an overly complicated solution to a problem (if this is indeed a problem). If you want graph connections there, why not just put them where the routes cross, rather than introducing extra segments that someone will undoubtedly want to clinch? Introducing another grab-bag system will undoubtedly create more problems down the road.
Title: Re: OH: I-76 60 label at south end of Ohio Turnpike Interchange
Post by: Jim on March 13, 2019, 07:57:21 pm
I am open to all possibilities.

You just hit on some of the reasons I haven't made introducing such a connector system, beyond the fact it would take time to develop.

The only reason it's a problem for me is that if my students are finding the shortest route between two points, it's not going to be possible to use the NY Thruway, much, for example.  I can easily enough explain why that is but it would be nice to remove oddities like this that can cause confusion at first.
Title: Re: OH: I-76 60 label at south end of Ohio Turnpike Interchange
Post by: yakra on March 14, 2019, 01:37:45 am
http://cmap.m-plex.com/tools/manual_points.php
Quote
There are common exceptions to positioning at centerline crossings, such as interchanges where ramps connect nearby, non-intersecting highways, or where a short access road connects a road to another with a trumpet or similar interchange. In these cases, the waypoints for the same interchange on the separate highways cannot be at the same coordinates. Instead, the waypoints should be where the connecting ramps or access road interchange with each highway.
Title: Re: OH: I-76 60 label at south end of Ohio Turnpike Interchange
Post by: Markkos1992 on March 14, 2019, 07:16:35 am
I may think further about this later.  The only interchange on the PA Turnpike offhand that I think could maybe use a graph connection would be New Stanton (Exit 75 due to I-70).
Title: Re: OH: I-76 60 label at south end of Ohio Turnpike Interchange
Post by: mapcat on March 14, 2019, 10:42:19 am
http://cmap.m-plex.com/tools/manual_points.php
Quote
There are common exceptions to positioning at centerline crossings, such as interchanges where ramps connect nearby, non-intersecting highways, or where a short access road connects a road to another with a trumpet or similar interchange. In these cases, the waypoints for the same interchange on the separate highways cannot be at the same coordinates. Instead, the waypoints should be where the connecting ramps or access road interchange with each highway.
So Tim thought this was important. He wasn't using this project for educational purposes. Jim is, and if this will assist him, I'm open to changing the policy. Of course I'd like to hear some arguments in favor of maintaining the current policy first.
Title: Re: OH: I-76 60 label at south end of Ohio Turnpike Interchange
Post by: yakra on March 14, 2019, 02:20:51 pm
The crossroad to receive the point is the connector, not the other numbered route the connector connects to.
Where shall we put ME I-295 28 and ME US1 I-295(28), then?
Title: Re: OH: I-76 60 label at south end of Ohio Turnpike Interchange
Post by: michih on March 14, 2019, 02:54:58 pm
As much as I'd like to fix graph connections

Me too! I hate these gaps! It was hard for me to accept the rule. I remember the discussion with Si.... :)

I thought I had a topic about this somewhere here or in a GitHub issue, but I'm not finding it.  The idea in the back of my mind for a few years now is to introduce a new (likely non-clinchable, but eventually preview- or active-level so it would get into graph generation) system to provide the segments that would turn into the missing edges.

I remember that you and me discussed about the possibility to show the "waypoint for the same interchange with different coordinates" as "Intersecting/Concurrent Routes" link in HB.

I am open to all possibilities.

Well, drafting a new system for trumpets? NO WAY! NEVER! :)
Title: Re: OH: I-76 60 label at south end of Ohio Turnpike Interchange
Post by: dave1693 on March 14, 2019, 05:21:01 pm
I may think further about this later.  The only interchange on the PA Turnpike offhand that I think could maybe use a graph connection would be New Stanton (Exit 75 due to I-70).

Lancaster/Reading/Denver, where the ramp from the Turnpike has an interchange with US222 on its way to its original terminus at what is now PA272 (original US222).

In general, I'm mildly in favor of changing the existing policy in the case of a straight double trumpet interchange. Still thinking about anything more complicated.
Title: Re: OH: I-76 60 label at south end of Ohio Turnpike Interchange
Post by: Markkos1992 on March 14, 2019, 06:04:23 pm
I may think further about this later.  The only interchange on the PA Turnpike offhand that I think could maybe use a graph connection would be New Stanton (Exit 75 due to I-70).

Lancaster/Reading/Denver, where the ramp from the Turnpike has an interchange with US222 on its way to its original terminus at what is now PA272 (original US222).

In general, I'm mildly in favor of changing the existing policy in the case of a straight double trumpet interchange. Still thinking about anything more complicated.

I did a quick glance and found quite a few that it may be useful at.  A quick glance at this one tells me no as this road actually becomes the at-grade Colonel Howard Blvd with a diamond interchange at US 222.
Title: Re: OH: I-76 60 label at south end of Ohio Turnpike Interchange
Post by: rickmastfan67 on March 14, 2019, 09:31:53 pm
So, we lose mileage on both routes, and an official multiplex on the connector road between the two?  Hmmmm, not a fan of this change to be honest.
Title: Re: OH: I-76 60 label at south end of Ohio Turnpike Interchange
Post by: vdeane on March 16, 2019, 06:33:34 pm
So, we lose mileage on both routes, and an official multiplex on the connector road between the two?  Hmmmm, not a fan of this change to be honest.
I think it was mentioned on the AARoads Forum that the way it is now is actually how the routes are officially defined by Ohio.
Title: Re: OH: I-76 60 label at south end of Ohio Turnpike Interchange
Post by: rickmastfan67 on March 17, 2019, 08:28:42 am
So, we lose mileage on both routes, and an official multiplex on the connector road between the two?  Hmmmm, not a fan of this change to be honest.
I think it was mentioned on the AARoads Forum that the way it is now is actually how the routes are officially defined by Ohio.

There does seem to be a 219.2 MM I-80 (https://goo.gl/maps/GQHSZP5mgPq) under the overpasses where you say the swap happens.  HOWEVER, there is a I-76 218.8 MM (https://goo.gl/maps/RP4akXd57aB2) between the Ohio Turnpike Exit 218 & the overpass, which seems to indicate that I-76 does indeed go to the interchange.

So, IMO, since this is a Turnpike interchange (since when have we ever centered these types on interchanges), 2 separate trumpet interchanges, & all 'overhead' signage indicate the swaps are at the ramps, and not the overpasses (sans that one I-80 MM which most people wouldn't notice), I think we should revert the change.
Title: Re: OH: I-76 60 label at south end of Ohio Turnpike Interchange
Post by: mapcat on March 17, 2019, 11:24:59 pm
So, we lose mileage on both routes, and an official multiplex on the connector road between the two?  Hmmmm, not a fan of this change to be honest.

A loss of what, about 2 miles? Not much different from what happens when I eliminate some of the excessive shaping points on various routes as I encounter them.

(since when have we ever centered these types on interchanges)

Even if the answer is "never", that doesn't mean we shouldn't reevaluate this policy.

I'll hold off on redoing any of the other turnpike interchanges to give others some time to share their opinions. I'm in no hurry.
Title: Re: OH: I-76 60 label at south end of Ohio Turnpike Interchange
Post by: michih on March 18, 2019, 02:03:09 pm
For I76/I80 I'm in favor for one wp per i/c as it is now: http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=41.109914&lon=-80.837831
For I77/I80 I prefer two wps as-is, I77: http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=41.273904&lon=-81.636400 / I80: http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=41.271033&lon=-81.622581
I don't like additional turnpike routes to connect I77/I80 wps.
Title: Re: OH: I-76 60 label at south end of Ohio Turnpike Interchange
Post by: yakra on April 02, 2019, 03:24:21 pm
Double trumpets, connecting roads, two waypoints.

Some of these changes are going too far to try to get graph connections, and more poorly representing the roads in the process.
Consider especially the "official multiplex on the connector road between the two", which already had graph connections.
Title: Re: OH: I-76 60 label at south end of Ohio Turnpike Interchange
Post by: rickmastfan67 on April 15, 2019, 02:55:42 am
Double trumpets, connecting roads, two waypoints.

Some of these changes are going too far to try to get graph connections, and more poorly representing the roads in the process.
Consider especially the "official multiplex on the connector road between the two", which already had graph connections.

Totally agree with you on this Yakra.  Double trumpets = two waypoints.  Especially since they already had graph connections before the change.

Also, take a look @ MM 218.6.  WB I-80 (https://goo.gl/maps/FrNB2F3r2XR2) on one side, EB I-76 (https://goo.gl/maps/9G36iXcMYAS2) on the other because that's where the ramp from the trumpet connects that's carrying I-76 onto the OH Turnpike.  So, we should go back to the way it was IMO.
Title: Re: OH: I-76 60 label at south end of Ohio Turnpike Interchange
Post by: mapcat on April 15, 2019, 08:31:01 am
Thanks for the input. I'll make a decision when I embark on the overhaul of all the routes in the state sometime this summer.
Title: Re: OH: I-76 60 label at south end of Ohio Turnpike Interchange
Post by: rickmastfan67 on August 07, 2020, 01:47:44 am
Sorry, but even now, I'm still on the "Double trumpets, connecting roads, two waypoints" side for the I-76/I-80 interchange.  Even with the OH-8 interchange (Exit 180).  The I-76/I-80 interchange already had the graph connections via the connector road since both Interstates used it to change on/off the Turnpike.

I mean, sure, we want graph connections as much as possible.  But with trumpets on toll highways, it's not always possible.

If we want to go with graph connections between highways like this, we should have a vote to change the manual to allow it, because I don't think the manual approves of something like this (but I could be wrong).
Title: Re: OH: I-76 60 label at south end of Ohio Turnpike Interchange
Post by: Duke87 on August 09, 2020, 10:40:10 pm
Yeah I just noticed this and I have to agree - I favor the mapping along the double trumpet. The way it now is, the concurrency that physically exists between the two routes is totally ignored, and the routes are shown jumping at a point where they don't actually connect.

I'm not really sure why in this case you'd not map along the double trumpet - you're not missing a graph connection by doing so, and it's not "needlessly complicated" - it's topologically accurate.
Title: Re: OH: I-76 60 label at south end of Ohio Turnpike Interchange
Post by: mapcat on September 28, 2020, 03:12:36 pm
All right, you're getting your double trumpet back. And 60 +> 218. Changes made to my local copy.
Title: Re: OH: I-76 60 label at south end of Ohio Turnpike Interchange
Post by: mapcat on September 28, 2020, 11:56:07 pm
https://github.com/TravelMapping/HighwayData/pull/4203
Title: Re: OH: I-76 60 label at south end of Ohio Turnpike Interchange
Post by: Markkos1992 on September 29, 2020, 09:44:39 am
Of course, the I-76 Sharp Angle errors are back.  Though I am sure that was expected.