Recent Posts

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10
1
Updates to Highway Data / Re: OR: I-30 BL St Helens
« Last post by Bickendan on Yesterday at 09:52:26 pm »
Nothing from northbound (westbound) US 30; it's possible there might be something coming in from Columbia City, but I doubt it.

I'm inclined to do draft this as signed myself, with the collaborator inside joke angle as a bonus.
2
Updates to Highway Data / HRV: D517 Beli Manastir bypass
« Last post by michih on Yesterday at 03:38:37 pm »
https://www.skyscrapercity.com/threads/440820/post-180420796

(just notice to self while traveling for the next weeks)
3
Updates to Highway Data / CHE: A9 Visp opening
« Last post by michih on Yesterday at 03:37:39 pm »
4
I'm going to continue, and won't bother with the border points, on the assumption that they will be investigated.

Investigated by whom? I positioned non-region-border-wps to the best of my knowledge when drafting the routes. At shp file location, at a sign, at a km post/stone, change in pavement or - if no other source - where OSM indicates the border. Not so accurate from the very beginning (first systems drafted) but OCC routes for sure. I'm not sure how important the exact locations are as long as they are between the right junction wps. I agree on region (especially country) border location accuracy but departement borders are less important IMO. I won't check them again as I spent a lot of time on it when drafting.

Edit: It's "funny" (= sad) that shp file locations (most reliable source) are often not confirmed by actual situation on-site (GSV) :(
5
Updates to Highway Data / POL: DW987's north end
« Last post by michih on Yesterday at 01:34:48 pm »
South end has been relocated but north end too! It's routed via the new Kolbuszowa southern bypass now. It's signed well but the old route is also still signed. However, only on old sigs at the DK9 junction and in the village but not at the junction south of the village where the new route turns eastwards. OSM was also recently updated.

The wps can be moved and get the right labels because DK9 and DW987 have not been traveled by any TM user so far. Since I traveled them today, I still need the old DW987 wp on DK9 but will rename the wp name in my list file (PlacWol?).
6
Updates to Highway Data / Re: SD: SD 231, SD 445, & SD 473 are unsigned
« Last post by the_spui_ninja on Yesterday at 01:22:45 pm »
How are the dog tags for routes like 473 any different from reference markers in NY, blade shields in NJ, or the nearly identical dog tags in VA? It seems very arbitrary if these routes are included in South Dakota but omitted in other states. If SD 248 is on there, we need to have NY 990V as well because all the blades say "ROUTE 990V".

Personally, I'd be for including all of these, but we need some level of consistency between states.

There was some support for counting VA dog tags when this was last discussed, though this does not appear to have been implemented in the HB.
My main argument for keeping these in, at least in SD, is that SDDOT on paper makes it very obvious that these routes are the exact same as all the others and then in the field under-signs them for some reason. I had an email exchange with DOT a while back about why 473 was signed the way it is; I'll have to see if I can find that.
7
Updates to Highway Data / Re: OR: I-30 BL St Helens
« Last post by the_spui_ninja on Yesterday at 01:13:33 pm »
So I'm betting what happened is the city decided they wanted a business loop, ordered signs via a form, clicked the wrong type of shield, and then received all the I-30 BL signage. To be be both frugal and environmentally friendly (waste not want not!), they used the signs anyway (all of this is conjecture). Honestly, I'd be down for adding this in as I-30 BL as kind of a collaborator inside joke, a mockery of bad city-spec signage, but that really shouldn't hold any weight.

Was there any signage from 30 itself?
8
I'm going to continue, and won't bother with the border points, on the assumption that they will be investigated.

M50, M50Tou, M50D, M50E, M54 - all fine

M57 - does it extend east along M66 to D57?

M57Ore - fine

M59 - M14_E/W -> M14_N/S ?

M59A, M59B, M59E, M61 - all fine

M63 - M2_W/E -> M2_N/S ?

M63A, M63B, M63E, M63G, M63H, M63J, M63W, M63WTou - all fine
M64, M64Aus, M64Bal, M64C, M64D, M64F, M65, M65B, M66, M66D, M66H, M68 - all fine
M70, M70A, M70B, M70E, M70G, M70W, M77, M77Bea, M77A, M77C, M77F, M77G - all fine
M82, M82C, M94, M112, M113 - all fine

M113A - the eastern end is a complex junction. Does the M113A reach the A61? Does the M916 reach the A620? The current situation of mapping both M roads ending at a roundabout with ramps from both Autoroutes (and labelling it on both as the M road, not the higher status A road they haven't had a junction with) seems poor.

M113AToW, M120 - both fine

M120A - M923/D980 -> M923/M980

M120N, M126, M188, M632, M632W, M820, M824, M826, M888, M901, M902 - all fine

M904B - add point for Rue Leon Jounaux to match point on M63W

M914 - fine

M916
 - M113A -> A620 and move? (see M113A)
 - add point for GSJ with Rue des Cosmonautes

M923 - fine

M924 - N124 -> N224

M924A, M964, M980 - all fine
9
Updates to Highway Data / Re: CA: CA 178 (Lake Isabella) exit number corrections
« Last post by oscar on Yesterday at 12:58:27 am »
Pending pull requests (probably will not be processed before Saturday evening):

https://github.com/TravelMapping/HighwayData/pull/6037
https://github.com/TravelMapping/HighwayData/pull/6038
10
Updates to Highway Data / Re: CA: CA 162 (Covelo) extension
« Last post by oscar on Yesterday at 12:57:51 am »
Pending pull requests (probably will not be processed before Saturday evening):

https://github.com/TravelMapping/HighwayData/pull/6037
https://github.com/TravelMapping/HighwayData/pull/6038
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10