Travel Mapping

Highway Data Discussion => In-progress Highway Systems & Work => Completed Highway Systems Threads => Topic started by: wphiii on February 23, 2016, 11:06:56 am

Title: Tennessee State Highways (usatn)
Post by: wphiii on February 23, 2016, 11:06:56 am
I apologize if it's a gross breach in protocol to post this thread in this sub-forum, but I wasn't sure really where else it would belong. The Tennessee State Highway system is one of the systems that I've been awaiting most eagerly, but it doesn't appear that any work has been done for it.

I'd love to be able to help this project what little I can by doing some of the "grunt work" involved in plotting points for the routes, etc. From clicking around on GitHub I think I've got the gist of the format. I don't really know anything about the .wpt extension, but at the very very least I can work up the data in plain text if that's the most appropriate first step to do (unless there's some quick-and-dirty way to convert plain text to .wpt that I could do myself).

So, is the usatn system indeed completely virgin? If so, could I start working up files for those roads, and is there anything additional I'd need to know to begin doing so? Is there a better resource for these roads than Google Maps/Wikipedia? Is trying to bring a relative noob into this process more trouble than it's worth? I'll hang up and listen.

- Will
Title: Re: usatn: Tennessee State Highways (?)
Post by: mapcat on February 23, 2016, 01:18:07 pm
Thanks for offering. Since Tennessee is one of James's (rickmastfan67) states, I suspect he will be taking the lead on this. He's currently working his way through the Florida state roads, however, and hasn't expressed when he might be ready to start work on the Tennessee highways as far as I know.


Please stick around and follow the conversations here to see when/if there will be an opportunity to begin on this, or at least help in other ways.
Title: Re: usatn: Tennessee State Highways (?)
Post by: yakra on February 23, 2016, 03:30:13 pm
I don't really know anything about the .wpt extension, but at the very very least I can work up the data in plain text if that's the most appropriate first step to do (unless there's some quick-and-dirty way to convert plain text to .wpt that I could do myself).
The .wpt format is very simple. It's nothing more than plain text -- plain text files that happen to use the .wpt extension.

So, is the usatn system indeed completely virgin?
Apart from the routes already live in usansf / United States Select Numbered State Freeways (http://tm.teresco.org/devel/hb.php?sys=usansf&rg=TN) (which would be migrated over to usatn once complete), I believe it is.

Correct me if I'm way off base here, but ISTR that TN has primary and secondary routes, with different shield styles for each, and that a single route number can flip-flop mid-route between primary & secondary status, with the corresponding changes in shield style. Kinda like (*groan*) Vermont, only a Much Bigger Deal, and much more pervasive. This would be a big complicating factor to sort out before work begins.

These few comments aside, I'll also hang up and wait for rickmastfan67's response.
Title: Re: usatn: Tennessee State Highways (?)
Post by: Duke87 on February 23, 2016, 08:59:54 pm
Correct me if I'm way off base here, but ISTR that TN has primary and secondary routes, with different shield styles for each, and that a single route number can flip-flop mid-route between primary & secondary status, with the corresponding changes in shield style. Kinda like (*groan*) Vermont, only a Much Bigger Deal, and much more pervasive. This would be a big complicating factor to sort out before work begins.

This is pretty accurate. Like with Vermont, the same highway can change between primary and secondary status, potentially multiple times. Like with Vermont, this distinction has only existed for the past 20-25 years or so when the current primary shield was implemented, all routes used to carry what now is the secondary shield.

Unlike with Vermont, the shield shape does not denote different maintenance responsibility. And while Vermont only has some "secondary" routes here and there, in Tennessee they're all over the place. It's a huge mess.

It would seem to me that the simplest way to handle this would be to ignore the distinction and just swallow the entire primary/secondary system in one gulp. On the other hand, there is some precedent in existing data hinting at handling the secondary routes separately - if you look at the waypoints for US highways in Tennessee, they are named in the format "TN##" for primary routes but "TNs##" for secondary routes. If we combine the primary and secondary systems, it might make sense to change the names of all these points accordingly.
Title: Re: usatn: Tennessee State Highways (?)
Post by: oscar on February 23, 2016, 11:49:29 pm
There was some discussion somewhere on the aaroads forum (sorry, no time to look it up right now) about the abolition of the primary/secondary distinction in TN, even though there were plenty of secondary route markers still out there last time I was there last month. That would support Duke87's suggestion.

As for naming US route waypoints all as TNxxx (no TNsYYY), that's consistent with what we did with waypoints on the TCH routes in Canada's prairie provinces. which are all ABxxx, SKxxx, and MBxxx, even though all three provinces have different route markers for what was once the primary and secondary systems in AB, and still are similar systems in the other provinces. But rickmastfan67 is still following that distinction in Ontario, and might prefer to do likewise in TN.
Title: Re: usatn: Tennessee State Highways (?)
Post by: rickmastfan67 on February 24, 2016, 02:47:57 am
Thanks for offering. Since Tennessee is one of James's (rickmastfan67) states, I suspect he will be taking the lead on this. He's currently working his way through the Florida state roads, however, and hasn't expressed when he might be ready to start work on the Tennessee highways as far as I know.

I have no problem if somebody else wants to do the state routes for TN.  I just need to finish overhauling US-64 first up to the current standards.  That's the last highway in the state that is pretty much lacking shaping points.

There was some discussion somewhere on the aaroads forum (sorry, no time to look it up right now) about the abolition of the primary/secondary distinction in TN, even though there were plenty of secondary route markers still out there last time I was there last month. That would support Duke87's suggestion.

I hadn't heard anything about that yet.  If that's the case and they are all to be considered as 'one' system in the eyes of TN, I would support converting all the 'TNs###' points to 'TN###', but not until it's official.

As for naming US route waypoints all as TNxxx (no TNsYYY), that's consistent with what we did with waypoints on the TCH routes in Canada's prairie provinces. which are all ABxxx, SKxxx, and MBxxx, even though all three provinces have different route markers for what was once the primary and secondary systems in AB, and still are similar systems in the other provinces. But rickmastfan67 is still following that distinction in Ontario, and might prefer to do likewise in TN.

As for the origins of the 'TNs###' naming style, Tim was on board for it when we were creating the original US Highways files.  It was also one of the early states to be done, well before Ontario was even started on, and same with the other Canadian provinces.
Title: Tennessee State Highways (usatn)
Post by: mapcat on December 04, 2016, 05:23:38 pm
James offered to let me draft usatn, and so I look forward to getting started over Christmas break.

Before I dive in, there are two issues worth discussing: how to handle the primary/secondary division of these routes, and how to deal with unsigned state highways that follow US highways.

There are varying descriptions of the meaning and status of the different classifications:

From AAroads's "Tennessee Gateway":

Quote from: AAroads
About the Tennessee Route System
State Routes in Tennessee were previously separated into secondary and primary routes. The differences were denoted by separate shield styles, with primary routes in rectangles and secondary routes in triangles. The two-tier system was derived from the Federal-Aid Primary and Federal Aid Secondary system of roads. That system was replaced with the National Highway System (NHS) in 1993, as part of the 1991 Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act (ISTEA). A de facto primary and secondary system still exists today, though the distinction is based upon importance versus funding/maintenance.

This 2016 NHS map (http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/planning/national_highway_system/nhs_maps/tennessee/tn_tennessee.pdf) shows that not all routes that use the primary shield are NHS routes. However, this AAroads forum post (http://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=16469.0) asserts that there is simply one system (albeit without citing any official source). The quote in the first post refers to the distinction disappearing on the official map in 2007, although it actually disappeared in 2004 (I checked the ones in my collection). Since then, the official state highway  (https://www.tn.gov/assets/entities/tdot/attachments/2015-16_Official_SMap_(Front_Side)1113215.pdf)map (https://www.tn.gov/assets/entities/tdot/attachments/2015-16_Official_SMap_(Front_Side)1113215.pdf) has shown both classifications separately, with distinct shields for each, but refers to both in the legend as "Tennessee State Routes". TDOT county maps (http://www.tn.gov/assets/entities/tdot/attachments/co16-functional-map.pdf) seem to agree with the classification split (although they classify both as "State Highways").

Personally I'd prefer to treat usatn as a single system, without differentiating between highways with different markers.

The other question is how to deal with the hidden state highways that follow the US highways. In general, we've been ignoring those, right? These mile markers (https://www.google.com/maps/@35.8346453,-88.5812763,3a,41y,51.47h,80.24t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sl0qZbMlRgq7jZMr4xIUVgA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) (US 70 mile 5 in Carroll County) wouldn't change anyone's mind, would they? How about these new signs (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tennessee_State_Route_1#/media/File:TN-1-sign-Cumberland-County-tn1.jpg)? One drawback to ignoring them is that their signed segments will exist as separate files. TN 1 is signed where it doesn't follow US highways in at least two (https://www.google.com/maps/@35.1552284,-90.0376226,3a,75y,44.92h,86.19t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1syqc71LZjlGh8wlh_HCnvBg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) places (https://www.google.com/maps/@35.9130967,-85.4772109,3a,75y,347.48h,93.13t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1seF1KEq3zn1f110O5qOS1KQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656).

Personally I'd prefer to ignore the unsigned segments and create the extra files.

What does everyone else think?
Title: Re: Tennessee State Highways (usatn)
Post by: oscar on December 04, 2016, 07:00:19 pm
The other question is how to deal with the hidden state highways that follow the US highways. In general, we've been ignoring those, right? These mile markers (https://www.google.com/maps/@35.8346453,-88.5812763,3a,41y,51.47h,80.24t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sl0qZbMlRgq7jZMr4xIUVgA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) (US 70 mile 5 in Carroll County) wouldn't change anyone's mind, would they? How about these new signs (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tennessee_State_Route_1#/media/File:TN-1-sign-Cumberland-County-tn1.jpg)? One drawback to ignoring them is that their signed segments will exist as separate files. TN 1 is signed where it doesn't follow US highways in at least two (https://www.google.com/maps/@35.1552284,-90.0376226,3a,75y,44.92h,86.19t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1syqc71LZjlGh8wlh_HCnvBg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) places (https://www.google.com/maps/@35.9130967,-85.4772109,3a,75y,347.48h,93.13t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1seF1KEq3zn1f110O5qOS1KQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656).

Personally I'd prefer to ignore the unsigned segments and create the extra files.

What does everyone else think?
Sounds like a common situation in California, where legislatively route segments connected by other routes are defined separately without including the connecting multiplexes. Sometimes the multiplexes are signed, some not. Whether they are or not, I've included "implied concurrences" in routes. The only fragmented routes are due to never-built connections (such as where the Sierra Nevadas get in the way), or less often decommissioned (as with the permanent closure to the general public in the middle of CA 173).
Title: Re: Tennessee State Highways (usatn)
Post by: si404 on December 04, 2016, 07:20:16 pm
I'd argue play it by ear - if you are crafting the system, then you will get a good feel for what is and what isn't a valid implied concurrency (and if people disagree with your choice, they can say so).

Obviously [END] plates break a route up (cf some usain routes). I felt that implied concurrencies that were 'lengthy', especially ones that changed what the route was 'concurrent' with, broke gbna roads, such as A5, A34 and A41, but that roads ending at the bypass on one side of town and re-emerging at the other despite the section of bypass having two numbers wasn't a route-breaker

As much as it would be so much easier to map if every route was logical, fully signed, etc, the real world isn't like that - which also provides roadgeeks a lot of stuff to talk about.
Title: Re: Tennessee State Highways (usatn)
Post by: the_spui_ninja on December 04, 2016, 08:24:16 pm
Personally I'd prefer to treat usatn as a single system, without differentiating between highways with different markers.
Well, for what it's worth, I think this makes sense, as it looks like some routes change back and forth between designs while still being continuous.
Title: Re: Tennessee State Highways (usatn)
Post by: bejacob on December 05, 2016, 09:04:06 am
There are a couple questions here.

As to the primary/secondary route split, I'm in favor of having one system for the state. It appears that some routes may be designated as primary in one are secondary in another despite being the same route (route 1 runs from Memphis to Bristol and changes back and forth, frequently running concurrently with US routes 64, 79, and 70 with many sections unsigned).

I'd also prefer to see each route as one file despite the unsigned sections along the concurrences. I suspect the number of routes will multiply quickly when breaking each route down for only the signed portions. Now if there really is a separation (like I-24 near Chattanooga where it dips into GA), not just an unsigned section, then breaking the route makes sense. Beyond that, I think one route, one file is better.
Title: Re: Tennessee State Highways (usatn)
Post by: froggie on December 07, 2016, 04:09:04 pm
Quote
I suspect the number of routes will multiply quickly when breaking each route down for only the signed portions.

Not as much as you might expect.  Most (and there aren't that many) of the cases where a mixed route is signed are cases where it's overlying US route got rerouted (usually due to a bypass), and the old route was retained as a state highway but not with a bannered US route.

I'm with Mapcat in this case...ignore the hidden routes.  This will also be a necessary consideration for when the Alabama state routes are created.

Regarding primary/secondary and one system or two, we've had a similar issue with Vermont and there's precedent there with considering it all a single system, especially considering the routes that go back and forth between primary and secondary.
Title: Re: Tennessee State Highways (usatn)
Post by: yakra on December 07, 2016, 06:46:53 pm
From the descriptions seen here, I'm also on board with a single system.
I agree with froggie on Vermont. (It's not a 1:1 comparison, but still a similar situation.)

I'm not well enough informed to have an opinion on the signed/unsigned issue.
Title: Re: Tennessee State Highways (usatn)
Post by: bejacob on December 08, 2016, 07:10:29 am
From the descriptions seen here, I'm also on board with a single system.

That part seems to have almost universal agreement. I'm sure there will be more comments, but the trends looks pretty clear.

I'm not well enough informed to have an opinion on the signed/unsigned issue.

I, too, will defer to others on this issue. While I like the idea of "one route, one file," it's not something I feel strongly about. It will be good to get these routes in the system, and whichever way they are set up, I look forward to filling in some gaps on my map between the Interstates and US highways.
Title: Re: Tennessee State Highways (usatn)
Post by: mapmikey on December 09, 2016, 01:38:00 pm
I also believe one system is the way to go.

As for state routes that are hidden.  If the trend is for Tennessee to post the mile markers like this relatively new marker on US 72/TN 86 near the Mississippi border linked below, than it might be enough to say they are posted.  Even at the current size mile marker, the state number can be seen at highway speeds.  So unless Tennessee is phasing this style of mile marker out, I would have no problem including the hidden ones...

https://goo.gl/maps/kyZPQHce2MN2

Title: Re: Tennessee State Highways (usatn)
Post by: mapcat on December 09, 2016, 03:20:35 pm
If the trend is for Tennessee to post the mile markers like this relatively new marker on US 72/TN 86 near the Mississippi border linked below, than it might be enough to say they are posted.  Even at the current size mile marker, the state number can be seen at highway speeds.  So unless Tennessee is phasing this style of mile marker out, I would have no problem including the hidden ones...

https://goo.gl/maps/kyZPQHce2MN2
That's what I was referring in my example of US 70 in Carroll County having 1 (for TN 1) on the mile marker instead of 70. Internally TDOT seems to always refer to all US routes by their TN numbers and only sometimes by their US numbers:

http://www.tn.gov/tdot/topic/sr-460-us-64-somerville-beltway-fayette-county
http://www.tn.gov/tdot/topic/state-route-1-interchange-at-state-route-10-96
http://www.tn.gov/tdot/topic/state-route-34-us-11e

Since all maps (including the official state highway map) show the TN numbers along with the US numbers, it would not be difficult to determine where all of them are. It would be significantly easier than determining the locations of all the signed segments of otherwise-hidden routes. The only reason not to is that, traditionally, unsigned routes (except interstates) are ignored.
Title: Re: Tennessee State Highways (usatn)
Post by: mapmikey on December 09, 2016, 04:34:17 pm
By trend I meant with larger signs.  The state route number has been on small mile markers like you posted from US 70 for at least 30 years.  You can see those at highway speeds, too...
Title: Re: Tennessee State Highways (usatn)
Post by: bejacob on December 09, 2016, 05:54:30 pm
Since all maps (including the official state highway map) show the TN numbers along with the US numbers, it would not be difficult to determine where all of them are. It would be significantly easier than determining the locations of all the signed segments of otherwise-hidden routes. The only reason not to is that, traditionally, unsigned routes (except interstates) are ignored.

Since the unsigned segments are on the official maps, they are officials routes IMHO. Based on the fact that these are on the state highway map, I'm still in favor of having the states routes from end to end even if parts are unsigned. Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't all the unsigned segments concurrent with another route? (meaning those parts would not add additional clinchable mileage anyway). I'll admit that signage is important especially in the field, but if we know where the routes are (based on the state map), I think it makes sense not to worry about which parts are signed and which parts are not. Draft the files for the entirety of the routes.
Title: Re: Tennessee State Highways (usatn)
Post by: mapcat on December 12, 2016, 11:19:03 pm
Thanks for the suggestions so far. I'll ping James to get his input since he's maintained the state for several years.

How do we deal with concurrencies that aren't really even implied concurrencies? TN 129 appears to end on US 31A here (https://www.google.com/maps/@35.3326585,-86.8596362,3a,75y,318.23h,88.93t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1slwhuF-UuOtxEWPV_7A71GA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) and then begin again about 2.5 miles north here (https://www.google.com/maps/@35.3618461,-86.8404638,3a,75y,113.75h,83.86t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sTyusk7p7sU2dLwbWURLaVw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656). TDOT documentation shows it as two separate routes; the same database includes many other unsigned concurrencies with US routes.
Title: Re: Tennessee State Highways (usatn)
Post by: michih on December 13, 2016, 03:07:10 am
How do we deal with concurrencies that aren't really even implied concurrencies? TN 129 appears to end on US 31A here (https://www.google.com/maps/@35.3326585,-86.8596362,3a,75y,318.23h,88.93t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1slwhuF-UuOtxEWPV_7A71GA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) and then begin again about 2.5 miles north here (https://www.google.com/maps/@35.3618461,-86.8404638,3a,75y,113.75h,83.86t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sTyusk7p7sU2dLwbWURLaVw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656). TDOT documentation shows it as two separate routes; the same database includes many other unsigned concurrencies with US routes.

I would not split the route because the distance between the end/beginning is small.
Title: Re: Tennessee State Highways (usatn)
Post by: yakra on December 13, 2016, 03:25:54 pm
I originally had NS2 in two segments, split by NS102 (DOT documentation was pretty clear about there being a gap); Tim advised me to join them together.
As usual, not a 1:1 comparison: There's TO {2} signage at each end.
Title: Re: Tennessee State Highways (usatn)
Post by: rickmastfan67 on December 15, 2016, 11:24:02 pm
Since all maps (including the official state highway map) show the TN numbers along with the US numbers, it would not be difficult to determine where all of them are. It would be significantly easier than determining the locations of all the signed segments of otherwise-hidden routes. The only reason not to is that, traditionally, unsigned routes (except interstates) are ignored.

Since the unsigned segments are on the official maps, they are officials routes IMHO. Based on the fact that these are on the state highway map, I'm still in favor of having the states routes from end to end even if parts are unsigned. Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't all the unsigned segments concurrent with another route? (meaning those parts would not add additional clinchable mileage anyway). I'll admit that signage is important especially in the field, but if we know where the routes are (based on the state map), I think it makes sense not to worry about which parts are signed and which parts are not. Draft the files for the entirety of the routes.

I would say NO to unsigned segments.  Reason is this is similar to Florida, as they like to attach SR's to all the US Highways & Interstates too, but I'm not adding in any SR unsigned segments in that state.  Some are completely hidden (like FL-9A under I-295), some have short segments of being signed (FL-20 has 3 different posted segments).
Title: Re: Tennessee State Highways (usatn)
Post by: mapcat on December 15, 2016, 11:34:00 pm
I would say NO to unsigned segments.  Reason is this is similar to Florida, as they like to attach SR's to all the US Highways & Interstates too, but I'm not adding in any SR unsigned segments in that state.  Some are completely hidden (like FL-9A under I-295), some have short segments of being signed (FL-20 has 3 different posted segments).

Thanks. Are you ok with me doing all of the TN routes as a single system (rather than primary/secondary)? One concern is all the TNsX point labels in the .wpts.
Title: Re: Tennessee State Highways (usatn)
Post by: bejacob on December 16, 2016, 09:09:06 am
I would say NO to unsigned segments.  Reason is this is similar to Florida, as they like to attach SR's to all the US Highways & Interstates too, but I'm not adding in any SR unsigned segments in that state.  Some are completely hidden (like FL-9A under I-295), some have short segments of being signed (FL-20 has 3 different posted segments).

Thanks. Are you ok with me doing all of the TN routes as a single system (rather than primary/secondary)? One concern is all the TNsX point labels in the .wpts.

Good point on the secondary waypoints. I'm still in favor of a single system for the TN state routes. That probably means renaming all the TNsX waypoints on existing routes to TNX. I know that will cause log errors, but given that you'll be adding a new tier to the state, I feel it's just part of the expansion process.
Title: Re: Tennessee State Highways (usatn)
Post by: Jim on December 16, 2016, 10:20:24 am
I would say NO to unsigned segments.  Reason is this is similar to Florida, as they like to attach SR's to all the US Highways & Interstates too, but I'm not adding in any SR unsigned segments in that state.  Some are completely hidden (like FL-9A under I-295), some have short segments of being signed (FL-20 has 3 different posted segments).

Thanks. Are you ok with me doing all of the TN routes as a single system (rather than primary/secondary)? One concern is all the TNsX point labels in the .wpts.

Good point on the secondary waypoints. I'm still in favor of a single system for the TN state routes. That probably means renaming all the TNsX waypoints on existing routes to TNX. I know that will cause log errors, but given that you'll be adding a new tier to the state, I feel it's just part of the expansion process.

You can keep them all, or just the ones in use, as hidden alternate labels.  We should avoid breaking people's lists for routes in active systems just because we're developing something new.
Title: Re: Tennessee State Highways (usatn)
Post by: mapcat on December 16, 2016, 10:43:04 am
I don't really care but was asking James since he would be the one making the edits, since it's still his state. It's not my place to put him in a position to have to do more work.
Title: Re: Tennessee State Highways (usatn)
Post by: mapcat on December 18, 2016, 01:19:15 pm
I'm done with the research and will probably begin drafting the routes this week. Based on the comments, for now I will plan on treating usatn as a single system, rather than separate primary/secondary. Looking at the routes in GMSV, it's obvious that signage is inconsistent, with primary and secondary signs occasionally being used for the same segment of a route.

How to deal with the unsigned routes isn't as clear, and my solution will probably not please everyone.
An extreme example of a split route deserving separate segments is TN66, which has three separate 0 mile markers over a very short (but convoluted) distance. But that is extreme, and I think there's only one other example of a three-part route (TN77). Most of the routes will only have one segment, and about thirty will have two. Overall there should be around 425 routes, including the unnumbered part of the James White Pkwy, which ought to be in usasf.
Title: Re: Tennessee State Highways (usatn)
Post by: yakra on December 18, 2016, 08:00:59 pm
Quote
the segments of the route exist a short distance from each other, such as being within the same county, and don't follow different routes in between
I came across some conundrums that tie into mostly this point while working on the Arkansas cleanup. No time to type my thoughts and questions out now unfortunately.
Title: Re: Tennessee State Highways (usatn)
Post by: rickmastfan67 on December 19, 2016, 01:57:00 am
I don't really care but was asking James since he would be the one making the edits, since it's still his state. It's not my place to put him in a position to have to do more work.

If you need to make changes to labels along multiplexes, go for it!  There shouldn't be any problems as long as you hide the original label if it's in use. ;)

I would say NO to unsigned segments.  Reason is this is similar to Florida, as they like to attach SR's to all the US Highways & Interstates too, but I'm not adding in any SR unsigned segments in that state.  Some are completely hidden (like FL-9A under I-295), some have short segments of being signed (FL-20 has 3 different posted segments).

Thanks. Are you ok with me doing all of the TN routes as a single system (rather than primary/secondary)? One concern is all the TNsX point labels in the .wpts.

I think a single system should be ok.  I've heard that Tennessee is possibly planning on merging them together themselves in the near future anyways, so, we might as well beat them to the punch. lol.
Title: Re: Tennessee State Highways (usatn)
Post by: si404 on December 19, 2016, 01:36:46 pm
One concern is all the TNsX point labels in the .wpts.
We can deal with fairly easily, though it is a little bit of work - depends on how many are in use though - it could be 10 seconds a file, or a couple of minutes. Simply do find/replace on existing files and then reinsert the in use ones as hidden points.
Title: Re: Tennessee State Highways (usatn)
Post by: yakra on December 19, 2016, 03:20:17 pm
We can deal with fairly easily, though it is a little bit of work - depends on how many are in use though - it could be 10 seconds a file, or a couple of minutes. Simply do find/replace on existing files and then reinsert the in use ones as hidden points.
I can see streamlining this with a few clever spreadsheet formulas, to just blindly give every one an AltLabel -- as long as you don't mind having the extraneous, unused AltLabels in the finished product...

Drawbacks include:
• Needing to know, before getting started, how many columns to include in the spreadsheet (maximum number of labels for any one point + 1)
• Snipping out extraneous whitespace before newlines after pasting the results back into the text editor. (find+replace " \n" -> "\n"; repeat until it's all gone)

OTOH, ISTR mapcat was one of those who expressed interest in cleaning up unused AltLabels in the thread on that topic, so perhaps this approach would be more trouble than it's worth, when factoring in that cleanup, vice, say, loading the pointsinuse into WPTedit and doing a find+relabel / find+demote.

So yeah, never mind, I guess?
Title: Re: Tennessee State Highways (usatn)
Post by: lkefct on December 29, 2016, 11:45:23 am
Having lived in Tennessee for four years, I was very excited to see this up and rolling!

I know this system is very much in the early stages of development, but here are a couple things I've noticed:

The system itself should read *Tennessee* State Highways (Not Tenessee)
TN15: End label should be TN14 (Not TN15)
TN22BusHun: End labels should be TN22_S and TN22_N
 
Tennessee is a bit of a mess to deal with, but your work is very much appreciated!!
Title: Re: Tennessee State Highways (usatn)
Post by: mapcat on December 29, 2016, 09:40:48 pm
Thanks for the suggestions. I was going to contact you once it was complete, since you seem to have more mileage in the state than anyone, so it's good to see you found the topic on your own.

Hope you don't mind if I wait on making changes until all the routes have been uploaded. I only created the csvs so that the collaborators working on the Mississippi and Georgia state routes could grab the coordinates of the Tennessee highways that start at the border. Based on my work schedule I doubt that the usatn set will be complete before May at the earliest. At that point I'll switch it from development to preview, and will welcome your corrections (and anyone else's) then.

Meanwhile, if you have any thoughts regarding the initial questions below (primary/secondary sets vs a single set, and whether to include unsigned state routes that follow US highways), or if you're aware of anything else I ought to consider as I work on the set, I'd appreciate anything you'd like to contribute.

Thanks for your enthusiasm!
Title: Re: Tennessee State Highways (usatn)
Post by: mapcat on January 18, 2017, 10:34:28 pm
Well, I was wrong about the timing. Either that, or I'm slacking at work. Whatever the case, usatn is ready for peer review now.

Generally speaking, the main sources I used were the TDOT functional classification maps (https://www.tn.gov/tdot/topic/maps-functional-classification). On the positive side, they show TDOT-maintained and signed routes fairly clearly. On the negative, when TN routes follow US routes, these maps show concurrencies even in cases where the TN route is unsigned. I turned to GMSV to determine which concurrencies were signed.

My criteria for splitting routes into signed segments are explained below, and in almost all cases I kept to them. This sometimes resulted in me drafting routes that didn't exactly match what was posted in the field, mainly because what was posted was inconclusive or misleading. Example: according to signage in the field, TN54 turns south to follow US45E (https://www.google.com/maps/@36.1542093,-88.8005565,3a,75y,291.83h,87.98t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s7PUMbr5UvQvJXQQLJo2rPQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!6m1!1e1?hl=en-US) in Greenfield, but then signage stops. West of Bradford on US45E, TN54 is shown heading east and west (https://www.google.com/maps/@36.0757232,-88.825797,3a,75y,169.77h,89.92t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sIzBTYaW1L604ffEgYk6udA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!6m1!1e1?hl=en-US), and it's also signed between US45E and TN105 in Bradfor (https://www.google.com/maps/@36.0767798,-88.8130899,3a,75y,316h,88.18t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1su-Wp4QKYV0k0vAzdWubWtg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!6m1!1e1?hl=en-US)d. I'm leaning towards changing it into two segments, one from Greenfield east and the other from 105 in Bradford west, but am open to suggestions.

Waypoint labels were based first on street signs as shown in GMSV, then property descriptions (http://tnmap.tn.gov/assessment/), then, if both failed, on OSM. OSM disagreed with what was posted/recorded enough that I lack confidence in its accuracy in Tennessee, especially in rural areas.

I also preferred using shaping points to named waypoints in places where the intersecting road was insignificant, so shaping points positioned near intersections with dead-end or other minor roads are usually intentional. This was meant to limit the number of less useful waypoints cluttering the lists in especially curvy roads, of which the state has plenty. I'll gladly add named waypoints for any user who needs one somewhere.

If anyone wants to see the spreadsheet with my notes on every route, just ask. I'll post it on Google docs.
Title: Re: Tennessee State Highways (usatn)
Post by: michih on January 19, 2017, 03:43:52 am
If anyone wants to see the spreadsheet with my notes on every route, just ask. I'll post it on Google docs.

Why don't you upload it to the usatn directory on GitHub? If there's any question - maybe after activation in 2 years - the reason for your decision is clear even if you would leave the project one day...
Title: Re: Tennessee State Highways (usatn)
Post by: bejacob on January 19, 2017, 01:40:32 pm
Great to see this system in preview so quickly. :)

Discovered a misnamed waypoint on TN141, Waypoint 7 is named TN25E. I think it should be TN25_E. Minor, I know. I'm sure these issues will be found during the full peer review. I just noticed this as I was working on adding the TN routes to my list.

Is it best to make such comments here as we find them or is there a preferred way to report corrections?
Title: Re: Tennessee State Highways (usatn)
Post by: Jim on January 19, 2017, 03:07:27 pm
^^ this is the right place, and corrections to anything you see are welcome any time, not only as part of a full review.
Title: Re: Tennessee State Highways (usatn)
Post by: mapcat on January 19, 2017, 06:41:14 pm
Why don't you upload it to the usatn directory on GitHub? If there's any question - maybe after activation in 2 years - the reason for your decision is clear even if you would leave the project one day...
Done. Link (https://github.com/TravelMapping/HighwayData/tree/master/hwy_data/TN/usatn/readme.md)

Discovered a misnamed waypoint on TN141
Thanks. Fixed in my copy, which will be submitted tonight.
Title: Re: Tennessee State Highways (usatn)
Post by: dfilpus on January 21, 2017, 12:12:26 pm
On TN62, a point at the Tuskegee/Tulane intersection in downtown Oak Ridge would be useful. It is the exit for the American Museum of Science and Energy, the visitor center for Oak Ridge Laboratory, which is the prime tourist attraction in Oak Ridge.
Title: Re: Tennessee State Highways (usatn)
Post by: mapcat on January 21, 2017, 08:05:50 pm
On TN62, a point at the Tuskegee/Tulane intersection in downtown Oak Ridge would be useful. It is the exit for the American Museum of Science and Energy, the visitor center for Oak Ridge Laboratory, which is the prime tourist attraction in Oak Ridge.

Sounds reasonable; it was hard to tell if that intersection or the one at Bethel Valley Rd were the most important for ORNL traffic. I'll keep BetValRd and add this one as well. Changed in my local files.
Title: Re: Tennessee State Highways (usatn)
Post by: bejacob on January 27, 2017, 09:38:45 am
Would if be possible to add a waypoint on TN54 at Haralson St in Brownsville? It's a short cut to TN19.

Had I been paying attention to highway signs, I might have continued on Main St to the corner where TN19 and TN54 intersect, rather than take the shortest route from Brownsville to Ripley. As it is I've covered about 2/3 of the distance between waypoints 7 and 8.
Title: Re: Tennessee State Highways (usatn)
Post by: mapcat on January 27, 2017, 01:30:55 pm
Would if be possible to add a waypoint on TN54 at Haralson St in Brownsville? It's a short cut to TN19.

Had I been paying attention to highway signs, I might have continued on Main St to the corner where TN19 and TN54 intersect, rather than take the shortest route from Brownsville to Ripley. As it is I've covered about 2/3 of the distance between waypoints 7 and 8.

You know, I almost put one there because I could have used it too, but thought it was too close to TN19 to justify another waypoint. But now that someone else finds it useful, sure, I'll add it.
Title: TN: US/usatn point requests/suggestions
Post by: oscar on February 17, 2017, 09:26:45 pm
This is a running log, as I slowly reconstruct my travels on Tennessee state routes (system just moved into preview) and related US routes. This is slow going while my vision recovers from yesterday's cataract surgery, but this is one way to use several weeks of downtime.

US 641:  Request/suggest a point for Main St. in Clifton, corresponding to the point at the other end on TN 128. My trip mapping files indicate I used Main St. as a shortcut between northbound US 641 (which then was part of TNs114) and northbound TN 128. Mu proposed waypoint perhaps could replace a nearby shaping point in the existing US 641 route file.
Title: Re: Tennessee State Highways (usatn)
Post by: mapcat on February 18, 2017, 05:55:39 pm
No problem to add that at all. Changed in my local files.

Best wishes with your recovery. Lots of time to plan more trips, I'm sure.

Title: Re: Tennessee State Highways (usatn)
Post by: oscar on February 18, 2017, 10:44:38 pm
Resuming my running log, as moved to this thread. No need to reply until I'm done.

TN 52:  US31E => US31E/231 (the existing label really confused me, since I was looking for the 231 junction)

Also, point request for the western junction of Celina Rd. between TN151 and OldGamRd (my actual return to TN 52 was on Nimm Rd., after a county-snagging foray on TN 151 -- but Celina Rd., just to the north, is a more reasonable point for other users).

TN 148:  WestBrowRd and EastBrowRd => WBrowRd and EBrowRd? (Not BrowRd_W and BrowRd_E, since they look like two separate Brow Roads that don't connect).

Also. point request for Lula Lake Rd., between GA/TN and WestBrowRd. Lula Lake is how I made the jump between TN 148 and GA 157 (which has its own LulaLakeRd points). But I could get by with WestBrowRd.

UPDATE: I think I've finished reconstructing my Tennessee state route travels (not much, most of my TN travels were on Interstates and US routes), and have no additional comments.
Title: Re: Tennessee State Highways (usatn)
Post by: si404 on February 28, 2017, 10:52:00 am
This review will only really deal with the routes as they are, and using Mapnik. If OSM's road names are wrong, or the roadways off, then I won't be addressing those issues. If there's incorrect routings on TM that match OSM then I won't spot them. I might find something in GMSV (such as TN7 Truck)

TN1 (Memphis): point required (grade-separated junction) at North Watkins Street. You probably want at least another point - I'd suggest McLean Blvd
TN1 (Sparta): good
TN2: good
TN3: point required (intersecting route) for I-40 exit 1A. CheAve -> 2ndSt_N ? point for Jefferson Avenue?
TN5: TN21 -> TN21_E
TN7 (Columbia): Those odd junctions probably ought to have point on the link road, rather than the overbridge. Point at North James Campbell Blvd?
TN7 (Ardmore): The state line is signed as being the railroad. At the AL53 junction TN7 is signed straight on along Main Street (https://www.google.com/maps/@34.9920943,-86.8468842,3a,62.9y,135.31h,91.32t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1swxyWKXyFkEeGOYD-7GScow!2e0!7i13312!8i6656), but other than the TN7 Truck Route sign (see below), there's nothing else beyond referring to TN7. I'd leave things as-is.
TN7 Trunk (Ardmore): New Route - While looking to see whether AL53 was genuinely at the border, I found a sign for a truck route of TN7 - it goes Ardmore Ridge Road (https://www.google.com/maps/@34.9923758,-86.8476774,3a,36.8y,133.71h,84.36t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sgXIuKOU-t4sn6cM52qUC8g!2e0!7i13312!8i6656), Austin Whitt Road (https://www.google.com/maps/@34.999157,-86.8467086,3a,75y,10.96h,75.87t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sNDgXc1xaLlOqqOTVzxXXBw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) and Austin (https://www.google.com/maps/@34.9923568,-86.8445299,3a,47.1y,26.44h,82.46t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s5TddF2jxQSZZnmlmuxuuoA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) Street (https://www.google.com/maps/@34.9919682,-86.8442345,3a,15.1y,292.42h,86.91t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sFun9HL4P7bTmaEM-ztS-HQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656).
TN8 (McMinnville): could have side roads rather than hidden points, but you've discussed that.
TN8 (Chattanooga): good

TN10: could have side roads rather than hidden points, but you've discussed that.
TN11: good
TN12: TN49 points - make reference to TN249 as well?
TN13: good
TN14: add points for GSJs with Old Austin Peay Highway (x2) and Scott Street. Add points added to TN3. Think about adding more points to route along Jackson Avenue.
TN15: good
TN16: good
TN17: points at Central Avenue and Holtzclaw Avenue (link to nearby freeway exits), ditto on US41 and US76. point at either Bailey Ave or McCallie Ave for route towards US11/64
TN18: good
TN19: good
Title: Re: Tennessee State Highways (usatn)
Post by: vespertine on March 05, 2017, 02:02:15 pm
Could it be possible to add waypoints on TN236 for Pembroke Rd (as an extension of KY115) and Barkers Mill Rd (as an extension of KY1881)? These satisfy personal requests for me, but there are probably many more situations where waypoints could be added to access the plethora of Kentucky routes just to the north.

v.
Title: Re: Tennessee State Highways (usatn)
Post by: mapcat on March 16, 2017, 12:33:41 pm
Thanks for the feedback so far.

TN 52:  US31E => US31E/231 (the existing label really confused me, since I was looking for the 231 junction)

Also, point request for the western junction of Celina Rd. between TN151 and OldGamRd (my actual return to TN 52 was on Nimm Rd., after a county-snagging foray on TN 151 -- but Celina Rd., just to the north, is a more reasonable point for other users).

TN 148:  WestBrowRd and EastBrowRd => WBrowRd and EBrowRd? (Not BrowRd_W and BrowRd_E, since they look like two separate Brow Roads that don't connect).

Also. point request for Lula Lake Rd., between GA/TN and WestBrowRd. Lula Lake is how I made the jump between TN 148 and GA 157 (which has its own LulaLakeRd points). But I could get by with WestBrowRd.
TN52 adjustments made and submitted.

TN148: LulaLakeRd added. Since West Brow and East Brow are features of Lookout Mountain, I looked at the "West" and "East" in this case as more integral to the road names, rather than just directional prefixes. But maybe I'm thinking too much here.

TN3: CheAve -> 2ndSt_N ?
TN7 (Columbia): Those odd junctions probably ought to have point on the link road, rather than the overbridge. Point at North James Campbell Blvd?
TN12: TN49 points - make reference to TN249 as well?
TN14: add points for GSJs with Old Austin Peay Highway (x2) and Scott Street. Add points added to TN3. Think about adding more points to route along Jackson Avenue.

TN3: There's no simple way to handle this (can't call it CheAve_W since it doesn't extend west of one of the N/S pair; 2ndSt_N doesn't apply to traffic on 3rd St) but since the only users likely to need this point would have come to it via 2nd Ave N, I went ahead and changed it to 2ndAve_N.
TN7Col: I'm leaving them alone since doing what you suggested would leave gaps between routes at their intersections. To me the odd junctions seem to be extended 2-way ramps, and gaps look like NMP errors on the maps.
TN12: I made the change for consistency, but TN249 isn't referenced on signs at the intersections per GMSV.
TN14: waypoints for McLeanBlvd and GSJs added, including another one for Raleigh Millington Rd.

All other suggested adjustments made and submitted.

Could it be possible to add waypoints on TN236 for Pembroke Rd (as an extension of KY115) and Barkers Mill Rd (as an extension of KY1881)? These satisfy personal requests for me, but there are probably many more situations where waypoints could be added to access the plethora of Kentucky routes just to the north.

Done. I checked other roads near the Kentucky border and found similar situations for KY52, KY78, and KY259, so additional waypoints have been added to those as well. I didn't see any other obvious needs, along the borders with Kentucky or any other state, but if you find more please let me know.
Title: Re: Tennessee State Highways (usatn)
Post by: si404 on March 20, 2017, 07:22:11 am
TN20: good
TN21: good
TN22: good
TN22A: good
TN22Bus (Huntingdon): good
TN25: good
TN27: good
TN29: good
TN30: good
TN31: good
TN32: good
TN33: good
TN34: good
TN35: US411/33 -> US411, but this is matter of taste, so this and similar in other routes can stay that way.
TN36: good
TN39: good
TN43: good
TN44: good
TN45: good
TN46 (Dickson): good
TN46 (Indian Mound): good
TN47: good
TN48: maybe a couple of shaping points can go to nearby roads
TN48Bus (Dickson): good
TN49: move nearby shaping points to Lakeland Drive (optional), Mobley Lane, Cedar Creek Road, Hayshed Road, Buck Branch Road, Danley Road, Fisher Road, Belt Road and Clay Gregory Road as they seem major/long enough, rather than little cul-de-sacs
Title: Re: Tennessee State Highways (usatn)
Post by: si404 on May 27, 2017, 07:44:35 am
TN50 Columbia: fine
TN50 Winchester: point at Dry Creek Road west of Winchester (links to US64, bypassing the town)
TN51: fine
TN52: shaping point west of Celina replace with point for Moss Arcot Rd (important enough as point at other end); ChesRidRd -> CheRidRd
TN52Trk Celina: fine
TN53: fine
TN54: point at old US412?
TN55: fine
TN55Bus McMinnville: fine
TN56 McMinnville: fine
TN56 Sewanee: fine
TN57: fine
TN58 Kingston: fine
TN58 Chattanooga: 40thSt_E - is 38thSt a better point?;
TN59: fine
TN60: fine
TN61: shaping point at Oliver Springs to neaten layout with TN330
TN62: shaping point at Oliver Springs to neaten layout with TN330; more points at the east end for roads that lead to GSJs: potential at TexasAve, KeithAve, 21stSt, 17th St, the I-40 ramps
TN63: fine
TN64: fine
TN66 Rogersville: Bro -> Bdwy?
TN66 Morristown: fine
TN66 Sevierville: fine
TN67: fine
TN68: fine
TN68 Georgia: fine
TN69 Savannah: fine
TN69 Paris: fine
TN69A: fine
Title: Re: Tennessee State Highways (usatn)
Post by: mapcat on May 28, 2017, 06:51:53 pm
TN66 Rogersville: Bro -> Bdwy?
Is this a standard abbreviation? I'm reluctant to change it otherwise, and seem to remember "Bro" in use elsewhere (possibly another region).

Other changes made & submitted.
Title: Re: Tennessee State Highways (usatn)
Post by: Jim on May 28, 2017, 09:05:52 pm
TN66 Rogersville: Bro -> Bdwy?
Is this a standard abbreviation? I'm reluctant to change it otherwise, and seem to remember "Bro" in use elsewhere (possibly another region).

Other changes made & submitted.

If there's a standard, we don't apply it very consistently.  But "Bro" is clearly the most popular.

Currently, our highway data has the following points labeled "Bro":

Code: [Select]
./BEL/beln0/bel.n048b.wpt:Bro http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=50.755284&lon=3.600007
./BEL/beln2/bel.n263.wpt:Bro http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=50.708811&lon=3.929656
./CA/usaib/ca.i008blelc.wpt:Bro http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=32.807672&lon=-116.922040
./CA/usaus/ca.us101.wpt:Bro +BroWay_SFr http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=37.795716&lon=-122.423417
./CO/usaco/co.co470.wpt:Bro http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=39.564257&lon=-104.987838
./DEU/deub/deu.b184.wpt:Bro http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=51.494343&lon=12.334213
./DEU/deub/deu.b460.wpt:Bro http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=49.666420&lon=8.812129
./ENG/gbna/eng.a0030.wpt:Bro http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=50.670867&lon=-4.241828
./ENG/gbna/eng.a0688.wpt:Bro http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=54.562010&lon=-1.879864
./IL/usail/il.il003.wpt:Bro http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=38.671472&lon=-90.171361
./IL/usail/il.il160.wpt:Bro http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=38.739524&lon=-89.671869
./IRL/irl.n083.wpt:Bro http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=53.434530&lon=-8.904204
./IRL/irln/irl.n014.wpt:Bro http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=54.870001&lon=-7.515378
./IRL/irln/irl.n017.wpt:Bro http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=53.434530&lon=-8.904204
./ME/usame/me.me009.wpt:Bro +Bway http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=43.630383&lon=-70.311446
./ME/usasf/me.mtapprd.wpt:Bro http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=43.625557&lon=-70.324913
./ME/usasf/me.scacon.wpt:Bro http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=43.628003&lon=-70.318127
./ME/usaus/me.us001.wpt:Bro +Bway http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=43.630174&lon=-70.292158
./MN/usamn/mn.mn061.wpt:Bro +Brdwy http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=47.751155&lon=-90.333152
./MO/usamo/mo.mo763.wpt:Bro http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=38.951366&lon=-92.321892
./MT/usamt/mt.mt080.wpt:Bro http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=47.516534&lon=-110.194974
./ND/usausb/nd.us002buswil.wpt:Bro +ND1804 http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=48.146553&lon=-103.621888
./ND/usausb/nd.us085buswil.wpt:Bro +ND1804 http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=48.146553&lon=-103.621888
./NE/usanes/ne.s15a.wpt:Bro http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=40.469102&lon=-101.741890
./NE/usaus/ne.us020.wpt:Bro http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=42.378749&lon=-97.366145
./NOR/norfv0/nor.fv037.wpt:Bro http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=59.704902&lon=9.555981
./NV/usanv/nv.nv396.wpt:Bro http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=40.185814&lon=-118.469452
./NY/usany/ny.ny022.wpt:Bro http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=43.172462&lon=-73.327475
./NY/usany/ny.ny032.wpt:Bro http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=41.930001&lon=-74.005655
./NY/usaus/ny.us009.wpt:Bro http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=40.848651&lon=-73.937473
./OK/usaok/ok.ok003ada.wpt:Bro http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=34.600060&lon=-96.345592
./OR/usaor/or.or099e.wpt:Bro +Brdwy http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=45.534747&lon=-122.661173
./PA/usapa/pa.pa033.wpt:Bro http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=40.861315&lon=-75.294402
./POL/poldk/pol.dk039.wpt:Bro http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=50.799751&lon=16.960487
./POL/poldw1/done/pol.dw177.wpt:Bro http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=53.303185&lon=16.188569
./POL/poldw1/done/pol.dw196.wpt:Bro http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=52.603751&lon=17.035503
./RI/usari/ri.ri103.wpt:Bro http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=41.813680&lon=-71.370438
./RI/usaus/ri.us006.wpt:Bro http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=41.815917&lon=-71.439374
./RI/usaus/ri.us044.wpt:Bro Bway http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=41.820167&lon=-71.368126
./SRB/eure/srb.e763.wpt:Bro http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=43.230759&lon=19.717884
./SRB/srbb/srb.b023.wpt:Bro http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=43.230759&lon=19.717884
./SWE/eure/swe.e22.wpt:Bro http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=56.321987&lon=16.032572
./SWE/swel/swe.l116.wpt:Bro http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=56.325824&lon=14.578654
./SWE/swel/swe.l261.wpt:Bro http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=59.325467&lon=17.901481
./SWE/swer/swe.r025.wpt:Bro http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=56.722877&lon=13.157673
./SWE/swer/swe.r051.wpt:Bro http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=58.801851&lon=15.425084
./SWE/swer/swe.r062.wpt:Bro http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=60.658209&lon=12.979317
./TN/usatn/tn.tn066.wpt:Bro http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=36.395636&lon=-83.012360
./TN/usatn/tn.tn070.wpt:Bro http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=36.395636&lon=-83.012360
./TX/usatx/tx.tx225.wpt:Bro http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=29.713343&lon=-95.278182
./TX/usatxl/tx.lp368.wpt:Bro http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=29.477922&lon=-98.462804
./TX/usaus/tx.us090.wpt:Bro http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=30.047564&lon=-94.335270
./UKR/eure/ukr.e87.wpt:Bro http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=45.368790&lon=28.787527
./UKR/ukrm/ukr.m015.wpt:Bro http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=45.368790&lon=28.787527
./WLS/gbna/wls.a0470.wpt:Bro http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=52.867783&lon=-3.914738
./WLS/gbna/wls.a0487.wpt:Bro http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=52.867783&lon=-3.914738

And the following points labeled "Bdwy":

Code: [Select]
./CA/usaush/ca.us080hissan.wpt:Bdwy http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=32.715720&lon=-117.153804
./CA/usaush/ca.us101hissan.wpt:Bdwy http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=32.715757&lon=-117.171099
./CA/usaush/ca.us395hissan.wpt:Bdwy http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=32.715720&lon=-117.153804
./CO/usaco/co.co088.wpt:Bdwy http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=39.624070&lon=-104.988012
./IMN/imna/imn.a011.wpt:Bdwy +Bro http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=54.157207&lon=-4.477014
./OK/usaush/ok.us066hiselr.wpt:Bdwy http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=35.447875&lon=-99.170237

4 of the 6 are in devel systems.

For fun, I also checked "Bway", which is slightly more popular:

Code: [Select]
./IA/usaus/ia.us218.wpt:Bway http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=42.538315&lon=-92.390771
./ID/usaid/id.id024.wpt:Bway http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=42.754692&lon=-113.498294
./KS/usaus/ks.us024.wpt:Bway http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=39.215780&lon=-96.178050
./MO/usamo/mo.mo163.wpt:Bway http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=38.951650&lon=-92.334123
./MO/usamo/mo.mo366.wpt:Bway http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=38.586149&lon=-90.226936
./MO/usamo/mo.mo740.wpt:Bway http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=38.953936&lon=-92.371416
./NH/usaus/nh.us003.wpt:Bway http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=43.142139&lon=-71.453286

There are no "Brwy" primary labels, but we do have a couple "Brdwy":

Code: [Select]
./OR/usaor/or.or099.wpt:Brdwy http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=44.050074&lon=-123.086486
./OR/usaor/or.or126busspr.wpt:Brdwy http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=44.050074&lon=-123.086486
Title: Re: Tennessee State Highways (usatn)
Post by: yakra on May 29, 2017, 12:45:52 am
There was some back & forth on Bro vs the alternatives back in the CHM days, with Bro being the accepted standard -- standard truncation of a single word of >4 letters, thus "Bro".
As you can see, I changed the ME9 entry to conform. ME77 has Bro_E & Bro_W, which aren't in the above results.
I've changed the NH and KS examples to Bro. (https://github.com/TravelMapping/HighwayData/pull/1283)

Edit: Jim, can you do a search for labels containing, rather than just matching, "Bway"? Just in case I have some more Bway_Foo labels to change...
Title: Re: Tennessee State Highways (usatn)
Post by: Jim on May 29, 2017, 08:38:51 am
Jim, can you do a search for labels containing, rather than just matching, "Bway"? Just in case I have some more Bway_Foo labels to change...

Sure.  Omitting matching alt labels.  Just a couple more show up.

Code: [Select]
./IA/usaus/ia.us218.wpt:Bway http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=42.538315&lon=-92.390771
./ID/usaid/id.id024.wpt:Bway http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=42.754692&lon=-113.498294
./ID/usaid/id.id075.wpt:BwayRun http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=43.634606&lon=-114.355788
../MO/usamo/mo.mo163.wpt:Bway http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=38.951650&lon=-92.334123
./MO/usamo/mo.mo231.wpt:Bway_S http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=38.522401&lon=-90.277576
./MO/usamo/mo.mo366.wpt:Bway http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=38.586149&lon=-90.226936
./MO/usamo/mo.mo740.wpt:Bway http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=38.953936&lon=-92.371416
Title: Re: Tennessee State Highways (usatn)
Post by: si404 on June 13, 2017, 11:16:00 am
TN70 - fine
TN72 - fine
TN73 - fine
TN73Tow - fine
TN74 - fine
TN75 - fine
TN76 - fine
TN76Cla - fine
TN76Whi - fine
TN77 - fine
TN77Mil - fine
TN77New - fine
TN78 - fine
TN79 - fine
TN80 - fine
TN81 - fine
TN82 - fine
TN83 - fine
TN84 - fine
TN85 - fine
TN87 - fine
TN88 - point at OldUS412?
TN89 - TNs89_W -> US45W_N; TNs89_E -> US45W_S
TN90 - fine
TN91 - fine
TN92 - fine
TN93 - fine
TN94 - fine
TN95 - fine
TN96 - fine
TN97 - fine
TN98 - fine
TN99 - fine
TN99Bra - fine
TN99Hoh - fine
Title: Re: Tennessee State Highways (usatn)
Post by: si404 on June 14, 2017, 10:24:11 am
TN100 - fine
TN101 - move hidden wpt 22 to a nearby road
TN102 - fine
TN103 - fine
TN104 - fine
TN104Dye - fine
TN104TrkDye - move shaping point to Market Street?
TN105 - fine
TN107 - fine
TN107Del - fine
TN108 - TN56_S -> TN56_A; TN56 -> TN56_S; TN55Bus/56_S _> TN56_B (no intersection with concurrent TN55Bus) The labels for TN56 are going to be messy, but the mess can be better.
TN109 - fine
Title: Re: Tennessee State Highways (usatn)
Post by: yakra on June 14, 2017, 05:48:13 pm
instead of TN56_A, TN56_S, TN56_B, why not just go straight to TN56_A, TN56_B, TN56_C. More intuitive; doesn't mix-n-match labeling styles.
Title: Re: Tennessee State Highways (usatn)
Post by: si404 on June 15, 2017, 03:56:46 am
instead of TN56_A, TN56_S, TN56_B, why not just go straight to TN56_A, TN56_B, TN56_C. More intuitive; doesn't mix-n-match labeling styles.
Yes, though TN56_N would have to be added into the mix and so it would go up to _D.

The concurrency in the middle (as opposed to the useless one at the north end) is currently between TN56_N and TN56.
Title: Re: Tennessee State Highways (usatn)
Post by: froggie on June 15, 2017, 07:44:38 am
I've never liked that part of Tim's waypoint labeling.  Always preferred a more a descriptive waypoint for multiple route crossings, like TN56Coa (for Coalmont) or TN56Alt (for Altamont).
Title: Re: Tennessee State Highways (usatn)
Post by: si404 on June 15, 2017, 08:46:56 am
Yes, 3 letter suffixes (or AbcN and AbcS for the middle set of close points) would be better.
Title: Re: Tennessee State Highways (usatn)
Post by: yakra on June 16, 2017, 12:30:52 am
I've never liked that part of Tim's waypoint labeling.  Always preferred a more a descriptive waypoint for multiple route crossings,
I tend to mix-n-match the two conventions, based on what works best in a given context. In Texas, there's a lot of FM42_A, FM42_B, FM42_C... In New England, I use town suffixes more, ME9_Sca, ME9_SPo, ME9_Cal, ME9_Bai. Then there's the hybrid AbcN type as Si mentioned: US1 has ME161_CarA, ME161_CarB, ME161_CarC, ME161_FtKS, and ME161_FtKN. :D
I think later on, Tim was moving toward deprecating city suffixes (?) (or at the very least, the 4-letter city+direction kind) in favor of just the _A _B _C type. Now THAT is what gave me heartburn. It got as far as making (Jeff, was it?) relabel a bunch of county roads in (WI, was it?) to a much less intuitive system. Yecch.

like TN56Coa (for Coalmont) or TN56Alt (for Altamont).
Though I've gotta be anal here and point out that  TN56Coa would be correct in the case of multiple segments of TN56 in the browser, one of which is the "TN56Coa" ("list file name") Coalmont segment. If there are multiple segments intersecting a route being plotted, we can use the highway name, in this case TN56Coa. Otherwise, if there's just one TN56, intersecting our route in multiple places, one of which is Coalmont, then the citty suffix tacked on to the TN56 label would use an underscore, I.E. TN56_Coa, TN56_Alt. (I can definitely see room for confusion here, and have seen a lot of such confusion in labeling in the HB over the years. Including in my own early work. US1AltWHAT? *Walks away whistling casually*)
Clear as mud?  ::)
Title: Re: Tennessee State Highways (usatn)
Post by: mapcat on June 16, 2017, 08:54:55 pm
For TN108 I decided to go with _S, _AltS, _AltN, and _N.
Title: Re: Tennessee State Highways (usatn)
Post by: si404 on June 29, 2017, 10:20:51 am
TN110 - fine
TN113 - fine
TN114 - fine
TN116 - fine
TN117 - fine
TN118 - TN54 -> TN54/89?
TN119 - fine
TN120 - fine
TN121 - fine
TN122 - fine
TN123 - fine
TN124 - fine
TN125 - fine
TN126 - shaping point before TN93_N move to Orebank Rd and make visible
TN127 - fine
TN128 - fine
TN128Trk - fine
TN129 - fine
Title: Re: Tennessee State Highways (usatn)
Post by: si404 on June 29, 2017, 11:49:12 am
TN131 to TN149 - fine
Title: Re: Tennessee State Highways (usatn)
Post by: si404 on July 25, 2017, 06:33:49 am
TN151 to TN168 - fine
TN169 - move shaping point to VanRd
TN170 to TN173 - fine
TN174 - add points for Conference Drive and Harris Drive (link to interchange)
TN175 - add points for Riverdale Road and the Forest Hill - Irene Road (link to interchange)
TN176 to TN199 - fine
Title: Re: Tennessee State Highways (usatn)
Post by: mapcat on July 25, 2017, 11:14:08 am
For TN174, since Conference Dr is only 250m away from the I-65 interchange, I added one at Caldwell Dr instead, which should serve visitors to the built-up area better. And I also added a point on TN175 for Kirby Pkwy since it also leads to an interchange. All other changes made and submitted.
Title: Re: Tennessee State Highways (usatn)
Post by: si404 on July 26, 2017, 02:51:34 pm
Conference Drive, while close, seems to be the route between the two freeways. However, Cadwell Drive is reasonable enough.

TN200 to TN205 - fine
TN206 - replace shaping points with points at Meade Lake Rd, Rosemark Rd (both yellow in OSM, so relatively major) and maybe Old Memphis Road
TN207 - fine
TN208 - add point for Lake Dr?
TN209 - TN88 -> TN88/180
TN210 to TN212 - fine
TN213 - are Lk and Aprt valid abbreviations?
TN214 to TN249 - fine
Title: Re: Tennessee State Highways (usatn)
Post by: si404 on July 27, 2017, 06:24:34 pm
TN250 to TN253 - fine
TN254 - are Pk and Mt valid abbrevs? I rather like them, but just to say that they aren't standard, AFAICS
TN255 to TN265 - fine
TN266 - US70S -> US41/70S
TN267 - fine
TN268 - US41 -> US41/70S; replace 1st shaping point with point at Sulphur Springs Road
TN269 - fine
TN269Eag - fine
TN270 - fine
TN271 - TN431 -> US431
TN272 to TN276 - fine
TN277 - I know it's close to the point for South Avenue, but South Boulevard looks to be worth adding a point for
TN279 to TN283 - fine
TN284 - Arpt
TN285 to TN291 - fine
TN292 - TN56 -> TN53;
TN293 - fine
TN294 - TN52 -> TN52/85
TN295 - fine
TN296 - fine
TN297 - IndRockTr -> IndRockTrl
TN298 - fine
TN299 - Lwr

General point - a couple of routes seem over zealously split when it comes to implied concurrencies.
Title: Re: Tennessee State Highways (usatn)
Post by: si404 on July 29, 2017, 08:57:57 am
TN400 to TN425 - fine
TN431 - ToTN22_Uni -> TN22_Uni; ToTN22_Mar -> TN22_Mar
TN434 to TN448 - fine
TN449 - point at McCarter Hollow Road, which seems to be the main entrance to Dollywood, rather than Dollywood Lane (which is the service entrance)
TN452 to TN477 - fine
Title: Re: Tennessee State Highways (usatn)
Post by: mapcat on July 29, 2017, 10:45:10 am
TN254 - are Pk and Mt valid abbrevs? I rather like them, but just to say that they aren't standard, AFAICS
The abbreviations appear on the signs in GMSV. "Pike" is spelled out sometimes, but "Pk" is frequent enough. It doesn't need to be abbreviated, I suppose, but then neither does Road.  "Mount" instead of "Mt" seems rather frequent as well.
Quote
TN277 - I know it's close to the point for South Avenue, but South Boulevard looks to be worth adding a point for
I added it, as it's a major connector, but wonder really how many users would care about using a waypoint that's one block off from the actual end of the segment they travelled. This one certainly will cause a NMP error.

Quote
General point - a couple of routes seem over zealously split when it comes to implied concurrencies.
I explained my criteria for splitting them upthread, so if you noticed a case where I deviated from them, please let me know and I'll look into it.

All others have been submitted.
Title: Re: Tennessee State Highways (usatn)
Post by: yakra on July 30, 2017, 01:18:01 am
Pk is used for Pike throughout Pennsylvania, so there's precedent there.
Mt is a USPS standard abbreviation, so that one should be fine.
Title: Re: Tennessee State Highways (usatn)
Post by: si404 on August 17, 2017, 10:17:10 am
Lets get these 300s done.

TN301 - TN346: fine

TN347: RockSprDr_N -> RockSprDr_W; RockSprDr_W -> RockSprDr_E

TN348 - TN380: fine

TN381: US19W -> US11E/19W

TN382 - TN390: fine

TN392: TNs101_N -> TN101_N; TNs101_S -> TN101_S (check concurrent US127Alt)

TN394 - TN399: fine

review done
Title: Re: Tennessee State Highways (usatn)
Post by: mapcat on August 17, 2017, 02:18:43 pm
TN347: RockSprDr_N -> RockSprDr_W; RockSprDr_W -> RockSprDr_E

Note that there is a Rock Spring Dr and a Rock Spring Rd, and TN 347 follows segments of both, so I believe that the existing labels (RockSprDr_N and RockSprRd_W) are correct.

Quote
TN392: TNs101_N -> TN101_N; TNs101_S -> TN101_S (check concurrent US127Alt)

Fixed TN381 & 392. Jim & I may eventually find a way to automate the TNs -> TN adjustment in the active systems.

Quote
review done

Thank you! I'll submit these changes this afternoon and if there are no further comments, I'll activate the system next week.
Title: Re: Tennessee State Highways (usatn)
Post by: yakra on August 17, 2017, 02:57:21 pm
Quote
Jim & I may eventually find a way to automate the TNs -> TN adjustment in the active systems.
Writing a script or program to do this may be fairly simple. You could even have it check pointsinuse.log to avoid putting extraneous AltLabels in the output files.
Only thing to watch out for would be label collisions, E.G. TNs101_N -> TN101_N if there's already a TN101_N elsewhere in the file. I see these being flagged, to be manually inspected and dealt with.

Heck, I could borrow a lot of classes and functions from GISplunge, and be a good ways toward seeing some progress...
I won't commit myself to that though; I have my hands in a lot of other sub-projects right now; gotta manage my time & attenton span... :)
Title: Re: Tennessee State Highways (usatn)
Post by: michih on August 17, 2017, 03:41:03 pm
A script to replace TNs by TN in all wpt files of TN region?
There are 599 left in TN region. Replacing is a maximum 30s job with Notepad++, plus commit+sync+pull request... Should I do it (tomorrow)?

(I already invested more time to write this post...)
Title: Re: Tennessee State Highways (usatn)
Post by: mapcat on August 17, 2017, 03:54:55 pm
A script to replace TNs by TN in all wpt files of TN region?
There are 599 left in TN region. Replacing is a maximum 30s job with Notepad++, plus commit+sync+pull request... Should I do it (tomorrow)?

(I already invested more time to write this post...)

30 seconds? Including checking for and deprecating the ones in use?
Title: Re: Tennessee State Highways (usatn)
Post by: michih on August 17, 2017, 04:15:33 pm
True. Sorry, I forgot the 232 wps in use containing TNs...

I should read posts more carefully...
Title: Re: Tennessee State Highways (usatn)
Post by: compdude787 on August 17, 2017, 05:16:17 pm
Why were they done as "TNs" in the first place?
Title: Re: Tennessee State Highways (usatn)
Post by: mapcat on August 17, 2017, 11:28:17 pm
Why were they done as "TNs" in the first place?
Tennessee has two different signs (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tennessee_State_Route_1), one for primary routes and one for secondary. When usaus, usausb, etc were drafted, the sign difference was considered evidence of two separate systems. But since routes can switch from primary to secondary seemingly arbitrarily, and because routes designated primary in documentation are sometimes signed secondary in the field (or vice versa), it seemed more reasonable to draft one usatn set instead of two.
Title: Re: Tennessee State Highways (usatn)
Post by: rickmastfan67 on August 18, 2017, 04:51:44 am
Quote
TN392: TNs101_N -> TN101_N; TNs101_S -> TN101_S (check concurrent US127Alt)

Fixed TN381 & 392. Jim & I may eventually find a way to automate the TNs -> TN adjustment in the active systems.

Sorry for all that work. lol.  At the time, Tim thought it was a good idea. lol.
Title: Re: Tennessee State Highways (usatn)
Post by: mapcat on August 18, 2017, 05:01:01 am
Sorry for all that work. lol.  At the time, Tim thought it was a good idea. lol.

No worries...it would have been a lot harder to switch from all TN labels to a mix of TN and TNs if your initial decision was different and you changed your mind later.
Title: Re: Tennessee State Highways (usatn)
Post by: yakra on August 22, 2017, 03:58:47 am
Writing a script or program to do this may be fairly simple. You could even have it check pointsinuse.log to avoid putting extraneous AltLabels in the output files.
Only thing to watch out for would be label collisions, E.G. TNs101_N -> TN101_N if there's already a TN101_N elsewhere in the file. I see these being flagged, to be manually inspected and dealt with.

Heck, I could borrow a lot of classes and functions from GISplunge, and be a good ways toward seeing some progress...
This is a work in progress.
So far, I'm at the point of identifying TNs labels and checking for potential label collisions, E.G. a primary label of TNs105 vs. a primary label or AltLabel of TN105, +TN105, or *TN105 anywhere in the file.
Next tasks:
• check labelsinuse, and relabel or demote points as appropriate
• create a CSV log of each TNs point and its fate (Relabeled, Demoted, NeedsManualCheck)
   - add a System column
• for routes that have changed, write a new file
• automate processing via a chopped routes CSV
   - load WPTs from system subdirectories
   - save WPTs into system subdirectories
Title: Re: Tennessee State Highways (usatn)
Post by: yakra on August 22, 2017, 05:32:38 pm
Almost ready to run this thing up the flagpole & see if anyone salutes.

All I have to do is:
• Get all the WPT files onto disk.
• Create a custom CSV full of all routes in TN, to automate processing
   - usai
   - usaif
   - usaky
   - usanp
   - usansf
   - usasf
   - usatn
   - usaus
   - usausb
Title: Re: Tennessee State Highways (usatn)
Post by: yakra on August 22, 2017, 06:24:20 pm
Yes, yes, good, good...
I'll create a branch on GitHub, upload the results,and check out the DIFFs shortly...
Title: Re: Tennessee State Highways (usatn)
Post by: mapcat on August 22, 2017, 07:04:18 pm
Thanks for working on this!

Activation pull submitted.
Title: Re: Tennessee State Highways (usatn)
Post by: yakra on August 22, 2017, 07:37:56 pm
Glitches in some output files, possibly due to a missing terminal line feed:
tn.tn386.wpt

tn.us031busfra.wpt
tn.us041altbypcla.wpt
tn.us045ebusmar.wpt
tn.us045wbushum.wpt
tn.us051busdye.wpt
tn.us064bypcle.wpt
tn.us070altbyphum.wpt
tn.us070altgib.wpt
tn.us070buscam.wpt
tn.us070busdic.wpt
tn.us070busleb.wpt
tn.us079byphum.wpt
tn.us127altcro.wpt
tn.us321busgre.wpt
tn.us412buscol.wpt

tn.us011w.wpt
tn.us019.wpt
tn.us019e.wpt
tn.us023.wpt
tn.us025.wpt
tn.us025e.wpt
tn.us031e.wpt
tn.us031w.wpt
tn.us045.wpt
tn.us045w.wpt
tn.us074.wpt
tn.us421.wpt


What looks good so far is that all these files are from the very first Tennessee (https://github.com/yakra/HighwayData/commit/dd6fa1182602976c15337daf8e2815aa197ab616) commit 2 years ago.

Going to resave these files, and run again.
Edit: Loaded each file into Pluma, and resaved without editing. Filesize increased by 1 byte every time. This is a good sign.
Title: Re: Tennessee State Highways (usatn)
Post by: yakra on August 22, 2017, 09:13:22 pm
BOOM.
HighwayData-master.zip (https://github.com/TravelMapping/HighwayData/archive/master.zip) downloaded 2017-08-22 17:32:28.
pointsinuse.log (http://tm.teresco.org/logs/pointsinuse.log) downloaded 2017-08-22 11:33:36.

@mapcat, take a gander...
• Files are here (https://github.com/yakra/HighwayData/tree/TNsRelabel/hwy_data/TN).
• Comparison & DIFFs vs. master (https://github.com/yakra/HighwayData/compare/TNsRelabel).
• ChangeLog (https://github.com/yakra/HighwayData/blob/TNsRelabel2/hwy_data/TN/label_changelog.csv) of TNs points detected, and their fates.
  (Nota bene: This file is contained in a different branch from that in the first two links. That way, you can pull the TNsRelabel branch into master, or your own branch, without dragging label_changelog.csv along.)

Of particular note:
Code: [Select]
System;Route;Point;Fate
usaus;tn.us011e.wpt;TNs66;NeedsManualCheck
usaus;tn.us070.wpt;TNs155;NeedsManualCheck
usaus;tn.us070s.wpt;TNs155;NeedsManualCheck
usaus;tn.us321.wpt;TNs67_W;NeedsManualCheck
usausb;tn.us041altnas.wpt;TNs155;NeedsManualCheck
Meaning US11E already has a TN66, US70 already has a TN155 (AltLabel in this case), etc.
Title: Re: Tennessee State Highways (usatn)
Post by: yakra on August 22, 2017, 10:25:03 pm
Activation pull submitted.
https://github.com/TravelMapping/HighwayData/pull/1552
Title: Re: Tennessee State Highways (usatn)
Post by: yakra on August 22, 2017, 11:26:33 pm
OK, this is weird. I happened across a glitch in my code after this was all done...

The following code shouldn't have worked...
Quote
void demote(char *newPriLbl)
{       char **newLblArray = new char*[NumLabels+1];
        newLblArray[0] = newPriLbl;
        for (unsigned short i=0; i < NumLabels; i++)
                newLblArray[i+1] = label;
        label = newLblArray;
        NumLabels++;
        char *FirstAlt = new char[strlen(label[1])];
        strcpy(FirstAlt, "+");
        strcat(FirstAlt, label[1]);
        delete label[1];
        label[1] = FirstAlt;
}

(I'd think I'd have wanted to do this instead:)
Quote
void demote(char *newPriLbl)
{       char **newLblArray = new char*[NumLabels+1];
        newLblArray[0] = newPriLbl;
        for (unsigned short i=0; i < NumLabels; i++)
                newLblArray[i+1] = label;
        label = newLblArray;
        NumLabels++;
        char *FirstAlt = new char[strlen(label[1])+1];
        strcpy(FirstAlt, "+");
        strcat(FirstAlt, label[1]);
        delete label[1];
        label[1] = FirstAlt;
}
...but it did work. (Was I just smashing the stack without realizing it, with no ill effects?)
From what I saw of the diffs, I saw no glitches at the end of the demoted labels (former primary labels, now the first AltLabels).

But let's keep our eyes peeled, eh?
If bad comes to worse and we *do* find glitches, I can just fix my code and rerun the program.
And the advantage to that would be, no need to worry about merge conflicts. :D
Title: Re: Tennessee State Highways (usatn)
Post by: yakra on August 23, 2017, 12:09:37 am
I just gave the DIFFs a closer look over, and all the demoted labels look fine, despite the foregoing.
Thankfully, the way GitHub highlights the DIFFs made this an easy task.
Title: Re: Tennessee State Highways (usatn)
Post by: yakra on August 23, 2017, 02:38:50 pm
Saving the changelog here just in case it's needed for future reference; I plan on deleting the GitHub branch where it's stored.
I've removed the leading "usa" from the system codes, to get this under the 20k character limit for posting.
Code: [Select]
System;Route;Point;Fate
if;tn.i069futtri.wpt;TNs77;Demoted
if;tn.i069futtri.wpt;TNs105;Demoted
if;tn.i069futtri.wpt;TNs183;Relabeled
if;tn.i069futtri.wpt;TNs183_End;Demoted
if;tn.i069futuni.wpt;TNs214_E;Demoted
if;tn.i269futmem.wpt;TNs193;Demoted
nsf;tn.tn153.wpt;TNs319_S;Demoted
nsf;tn.tn153.wpt;TNs319_N;Demoted
nsf;tn.tn385.wpt;TNs175;Relabeled
nsf;tn.tn385.wpt;TNs193;Demoted
nsf;tn.tn386.wpt;TNs174_W;Demoted
tn;tn.tn021.wpt;TNs216;Relabeled
tn;tn.tn044.wpt;TNs435_E;Relabeled
us;tn.us011.wpt;TNs318;Relabeled
us;tn.us011.wpt;TNs148;Demoted
us;tn.us011.wpt;TNs17_S;Demoted
us;tn.us011.wpt;TNs58;Relabeled
us;tn.us011.wpt;TNs320;Relabeled
us;tn.us011.wpt;TNs317_W;Relabeled
us;tn.us011.wpt;TNs321;Demoted
us;tn.us011.wpt;TNs312;Relabeled
us;tn.us011.wpt;TNs308;Relabeled
us;tn.us011.wpt;TNs163_E;Relabeled
us;tn.us011.wpt;TNs163_W;Relabeled
us;tn.us011.wpt;TNs39_E;Relabeled
us;tn.us011.wpt;TNs39_W;Relabeled
us;tn.us011.wpt;TNs305;Relabeled
us;tn.us011.wpt;TNs309;Relabeled
us;tn.us011.wpt;TNs322;Relabeled
us;tn.us011.wpt;TNs323;Relabeled
us;tn.us011.wpt;TNs324;Demoted
us;tn.us011.wpt;TNs131;Demoted
us;tn.us011e.wpt;TNs168;Demoted
us;tn.us011e.wpt;TNs139;Relabeled
us;tn.us011e.wpt;TNs341;Relabeled
us;tn.us011e.wpt;TNs342_N;Relabeled
us;tn.us011e.wpt;TNs474;Relabeled
us;tn.us011e.wpt;TNs66;NeedsManualCheck
us;tn.us011e.wpt;TNs343;Relabeled
us;tn.us011e.wpt;TNs344;Relabeled
us;tn.us011e.wpt;TNs113_S;Relabeled
us;tn.us011e.wpt;TNs113_N;Relabeled
us;tn.us011e.wpt;TNs348;Relabeled
us;tn.us011e.wpt;TNs172;Relabeled
us;tn.us011e.wpt;TNs351;Relabeled
us;tn.us011e.wpt;TNs75;Relabeled
us;tn.us011e.wpt;TNs354;Relabeled
us;tn.us011e.wpt;TNs91;Demoted
us;tn.us011e.wpt;TNs36;Demoted
us;tn.us011e.wpt;TNs44;Demoted
us;tn.us011e.wpt;TNs358;Relabeled
us;tn.us011w.wpt;TNs61;Demoted
us;tn.us011w.wpt;TNs344;Relabeled
us;tn.us011w.wpt;TNs346;Relabeled
us;tn.us011w.wpt;TNs346_W;Relabeled
us;tn.us011w.wpt;TNs346_E;Relabeled
us;tn.us011w.wpt;TNs36;Demoted
us;tn.us011w.wpt;TNs126;Relabeled
us;tn.us019.wpt;TNs358;Relabeled
us;tn.us019e.wpt;TNs143;Demoted
us;tn.us019e.wpt;TNs173;Relabeled
us;tn.us019e.wpt;TNs361;Demoted
us;tn.us019e.wpt;TNs91_N;Demoted
us;tn.us019e.wpt;TNs44;Demoted
us;tn.us019w.wpt;TNs36;Relabeled
us;tn.us019w.wpt;TNs44;Relabeled
us;tn.us023.wpt;TNs346;Demoted
us;tn.us025.wpt;TNs107_N;Demoted
us;tn.us025.wpt;TNs107_S;Relabeled
us;tn.us025.wpt;TNs340;Relabeled
us;tn.us025.wpt;TNs73;Relabeled
us;tn.us025e.wpt;TNs341;Relabeled
us;tn.us025e.wpt;TNs113_W;Relabeled
us;tn.us025e.wpt;TNs343_S;Relabeled
us;tn.us025e.wpt;TNs113_E;Relabeled
us;tn.us025e.wpt;TNs343_N;Relabeled
us;tn.us025e.wpt;TNs375;Relabeled
us;tn.us025e.wpt;TNs131;Demoted
us;tn.us025e.wpt;TNs345;Relabeled
us;tn.us025e.wpt;TNs63_E;Relabeled
us;tn.us025w.wpt;TNs363;Relabeled
us;tn.us025w.wpt;TNs113;Demoted
us;tn.us025w.wpt;TNs66;Relabeled
us;tn.us025w.wpt;TNs139_N;Relabeled
us;tn.us025w.wpt;TNs139_S;Relabeled
us;tn.us025w.wpt;TNs168;Relabeled
us;tn.us025w.wpt;TNs131_E;Demoted
us;tn.us025w.wpt;TNs131_W;Relabeled
us;tn.us025w.wpt;TNs170;Relabeled
us;tn.us025w.wpt;TNs116_S;Relabeled
us;tn.us025w.wpt;TNs116_N;Demoted
us;tn.us025w.wpt;TNs90;Demoted
us;tn.us025w.wpt;TNs297;Demoted
us;tn.us027.wpt;TNs319;Relabeled
us;tn.us027.wpt;TNs303;Relabeled
us;tn.us027.wpt;TNs60/378;Demoted
us;tn.us027.wpt;TNs378_N;Demoted
us;tn.us027.wpt;TNs302;Relabeled
us;tn.us027.wpt;TNs382;Relabeled
us;tn.us027.wpt;TNs29_S;Demoted
us;tn.us027.wpt;TNs328_S;Demoted
us;tn.us027.wpt;TNs328_N;Relabeled
us;tn.us027.wpt;TNs329;Relabeled
us;tn.us027.wpt;TNs297;Demoted
us;tn.us027.wpt;TNs456;Relabeled
us;tn.us031.wpt;TNs273_W;Relabeled
us;tn.us031.wpt;TNs273_E;Relabeled
us;tn.us031.wpt;TNs129;Relabeled
us;tn.us031.wpt;TNs245;Relabeled
us;tn.us031.wpt;TNs246;Demoted
us;tn.us031.wpt;TNs247_W;Relabeled
us;tn.us031.wpt;TNs247_E;Demoted
us;tn.us031.wpt;TNs248;Demoted
us;tn.us031.wpt;TNs441;Demoted
us;tn.us031.wpt;TNs253;Demoted
us;tn.us031.wpt;TNs252;Demoted
us;tn.us031.wpt;TNs255;Demoted
us;tn.us031.wpt;TNs155;Demoted
us;tn.us031e.wpt;TNs45;Relabeled
us;tn.us031e.wpt;TNs258;Relabeled
us;tn.us031e.wpt;TNs174;Relabeled
us;tn.us031w.wpt;TNs45;Demoted
us;tn.us031w.wpt;TNs174;Relabeled
us;tn.us031w.wpt;TNs257;Relabeled
us;tn.us031w.wpt;TNs258;Relabeled
us;tn.us031w.wpt;TNs76_W;Relabeled
us;tn.us031w.wpt;TNs76_E;Relabeled
us;tn.us031w.wpt;TNs259;Relabeled
us;tn.us041.wpt;TNs17_N;Demoted
us;tn.us041.wpt;TNs17_S;Demoted
us;tn.us041.wpt;TNs148;Demoted
us;tn.us041.wpt;TNs318;Demoted
us;tn.us041.wpt;TNs27;Demoted
us;tn.us041.wpt;TNs2_S;Demoted
us;tn.us041.wpt;TNs50;Demoted
us;tn.us041.wpt;TNs127;Demoted
us;tn.us041.wpt;TNs280;Relabeled
us;tn.us041.wpt;TNs64;Demoted
us;tn.us041.wpt;TNs99_E;Demoted
us;tn.us041.wpt;TNs268;Demoted
us;tn.us041.wpt;TNs102;Demoted
us;tn.us041.wpt;TNs266;Relabeled
us;tn.us041.wpt;TNs171;Relabeled
us;tn.us041.wpt;TNs255;Demoted
us;tn.us041.wpt;TNs45;Demoted
us;tn.us041.wpt;TNs174;Demoted
us;tn.us041.wpt;TNs257;Demoted
us;tn.us043.wpt;TNs227_W;Demoted
us;tn.us043.wpt;TNs227_E;Relabeled
us;tn.us043.wpt;TNs98;Relabeled
us;tn.us043.wpt;TNs240;Relabeled
us;tn.us043.wpt;TNs243;Relabeled
us;tn.us043.wpt;TNs166;Relabeled
us;tn.us043.wpt;TNs243_A;Relabeled
us;tn.us045.wpt;TNs142;Demoted
us;tn.us045.wpt;TNs199;Relabeled
us;tn.us045.wpt;TNs365_S;Demoted
us;tn.us045.wpt;TNs365_N;Relabeled
us;tn.us045.wpt;TNs197;Relabeled
us;tn.us045e.wpt;TNs186;Relabeled
us;tn.us045e.wpt;TNs152;Relabeled
us;tn.us045e.wpt;TNs187;Relabeled
us;tn.us045e.wpt;TNs104;Relabeled
us;tn.us045e.wpt;TNs425;Relabeled
us;tn.us045e.wpt;TNs89;Demoted
us;tn.us045e.wpt;TNs43_N;Relabeled
us;tn.us045w.wpt;TNs152;Relabeled
us;tn.us045w.wpt;TNs420;Relabeled
us;tn.us045w.wpt;TNs54_S;Relabeled
us;tn.us045w.wpt;TNs186;Relabeled
us;tn.us045w.wpt;TNs54_N;Relabeled
us;tn.us045w.wpt;TNs367_N;Relabeled
us;tn.us045w.wpt;TNs77/185;Relabeled
us;tn.us045w.wpt;TNs105;Relabeled
us;tn.us045w.wpt;TNs89_E;Relabeled
us;tn.us045w.wpt;TNs89_W;Relabeled
us;tn.us045w.wpt;TNs21;Relabeled
us;tn.us045w.wpt;TNs216;Relabeled
us;tn.us045w.wpt;TNs5/431;Demoted
us;tn.us045w.wpt;TNs431_E;Demoted
us;tn.us045w.wpt;TNs214_W;Demoted
us;tn.us045w.wpt;TNs214_E;Demoted
us;tn.us051.wpt;TNs175;Demoted
us;tn.us051.wpt;TNs3;Relabeled
us;tn.us051.wpt;TNs388;Demoted
us;tn.us051.wpt;TNs205;Demoted
us;tn.us051.wpt;TNs178;Relabeled
us;tn.us051.wpt;TNs206;Demoted
us;tn.us051.wpt;TNs384;Relabeled
us;tn.us051.wpt;TNs209;Relabeled
us;tn.us051.wpt;TNs87;Relabeled
us;tn.us051.wpt;TNs19_W;Relabeled
us;tn.us051.wpt;TNs208;Demoted
us;tn.us051.wpt;TNs180;Demoted
us;tn.us051.wpt;TNs88;Relabeled
us;tn.us051.wpt;TNs104;Relabeled
us;tn.us051.wpt;TNs77;Demoted
us;tn.us051.wpt;TNs105;Demoted
us;tn.us051.wpt;TNs183;Relabeled
us;tn.us051.wpt;TNs183_End;Relabeled
us;tn.us051.wpt;TNs21_W;Relabeled
us;tn.us051.wpt;TNs21_E;Relabeled
us;tn.us051.wpt;TNs184;Relabeled
us;tn.us051.wpt;TNs431;Demoted
us;tn.us051.wpt;TNs21_Uni;Relabeled
us;tn.us051.wpt;TNs214_E;Demoted
us;tn.us064.wpt;TNs57;Relabeled
us;tn.us064.wpt;TNs177;Relabeled
us;tn.us064.wpt;TNs205;Demoted
us;tn.us064.wpt;TNs196;Relabeled
us;tn.us064.wpt;TNs194;Relabeled
us;tn.us064.wpt;TNs179;Relabeled
us;tn.us064.wpt;TNs225;Relabeled
us;tn.us064.wpt;TNs224_S;Relabeled
us;tn.us064.wpt;TNs224_N;Relabeled
us;tn.us064.wpt;TNs69_N;Relabeled
us;tn.us064.wpt;TNs226;Relabeled
us;tn.us064.wpt;TNs99;Relabeled
us;tn.us064.wpt;TNs240;Demoted
us;tn.us064.wpt;TNs241;Relabeled
us;tn.us064.wpt;TNs242;Demoted
us;tn.us064.wpt;TNs166_N;Relabeled
us;tn.us064.wpt;TNs166_S;Relabeled
us;tn.us064.wpt;TNs244;Relabeled
us;tn.us064.wpt;TNs275;Relabeled
us;tn.us064.wpt;TNs121_S;Relabeled
us;tn.us064.wpt;TNs121_N;Relabeled
us;tn.us064.wpt;TNs2Kim_W;Demoted
us;tn.us064.wpt;TNs27;Demoted
us;tn.us064.wpt;TNs318;Demoted
us;tn.us064.wpt;TNs148;Demoted
us;tn.us064.wpt;TNs17_S;Demoted
us;tn.us064.wpt;TNs58;Relabeled
us;tn.us064.wpt;TNs320;Relabeled
us;tn.us064.wpt;TNs317_W;Relabeled
us;tn.us064.wpt;TNs321;Demoted
us;tn.us064.wpt;TNs74_S;Demoted
us;tn.us064.wpt;TNs314;Demoted
us;tn.us064.wpt;TNs30;Relabeled
us;tn.us070.wpt;TNs57;Relabeled
us;tn.us070.wpt;TNs177;Relabeled
us;tn.us070.wpt;TNs205_S;Demoted
us;tn.us070.wpt;TNs205_N;Demoted
us;tn.us070.wpt;TNs196;Relabeled
us;tn.us070.wpt;TNs222;Relabeled
us;tn.us070.wpt;TNs179;Relabeled
us;tn.us070.wpt;TNs19_E;Relabeled
us;tn.us070.wpt;TNs138;Relabeled
us;tn.us070.wpt;TNs223;Relabeled
us;tn.us070.wpt;TNs198;Relabeled
us;tn.us070.wpt;TNs152_W;Relabeled
us;tn.us070.wpt;TNs152_E;Relabeled
us;tn.us070.wpt;TNs104_S;Relabeled
us;tn.us070.wpt;TNs220;Relabeled
us;tn.us070.wpt;TNs104_N;Relabeled
us;tn.us070.wpt;TNs424;Relabeled
us;tn.us070.wpt;TNs219;Relabeled
us;tn.us070.wpt;TNs114_S;Relabeled
us;tn.us070.wpt;TNs114_N;Relabeled
us;tn.us070.wpt;TNs191;Relabeled
us;tn.us070.wpt;TNs231;Relabeled
us;tn.us070.wpt;TNs46_N;Demoted
us;tn.us070.wpt;TNs47_S;Relabeled
us;tn.us070.wpt;TNs249_S;Demoted
us;tn.us070.wpt;TNs249_N;Relabeled
us;tn.us070.wpt;TNs251;Relabeled
us;tn.us070.wpt;TNs155;NeedsManualCheck
us;tn.us070.wpt;TNs255;Demoted
us;tn.us070.wpt;TNs45;Demoted
us;tn.us070.wpt;TNs171;Demoted
us;tn.us070.wpt;TNs141_N;Demoted
us;tn.us070.wpt;TNs141_E;Relabeled
us;tn.us070.wpt;TNs267;Relabeled
us;tn.us070.wpt;TNs96_E;Demoted
us;tn.us070.wpt;TNs83;Relabeled
us;tn.us070.wpt;TNs146;Relabeled
us;tn.us070.wpt;TNs136;Relabeled
us;tn.us070.wpt;TNs1;Relabeled
us;tn.us070.wpt;TNs289;Relabeled
us;tn.us070.wpt;TNs84;Demoted
us;tn.us070.wpt;TNs101_S;Demoted
us;tn.us070.wpt;TNs101_N;Demoted
us;tn.us070.wpt;TNs299;Relabeled
us;tn.us070.wpt;TNs382;Relabeled
us;tn.us070.wpt;TNs29;Demoted
us;tn.us070.wpt;TNs326;Relabeled
us;tn.us070.wpt;TNs131;Demoted
us;tn.us070.wpt;TNs168;Relabeled
us;tn.us070.wpt;TNs139_S;Relabeled
us;tn.us070.wpt;TNs139_N;Relabeled
us;tn.us070.wpt;TNs66;Relabeled
us;tn.us070.wpt;TNs113;Demoted
us;tn.us070.wpt;TNs363;Relabeled
us;tn.us070.wpt;TNs73;Relabeled
us;tn.us070.wpt;TNs340;Relabeled
us;tn.us070.wpt;TNs107_S;Relabeled
us;tn.us070.wpt;TNs107_N;Demoted
us;tn.us070n.wpt;TNs264;Demoted
us;tn.us070n.wpt;TNs53_N;Relabeled
us;tn.us070n.wpt;TNs96_S;Relabeled
us;tn.us070n.wpt;TNs96_N;Relabeled
us;tn.us070n.wpt;TNs291;Relabeled
us;tn.us070n.wpt;TNs135;Demoted
us;tn.us070n.wpt;TNs136_S;Demoted
us;tn.us070n.wpt;TNs136_N;Relabeled
us;tn.us070n.wpt;TNs84_S;Relabeled
us;tn.us070n.wpt;TNs164;Demoted
us;tn.us070s.wpt;TNs251;Relabeled
us;tn.us070s.wpt;TNs155;NeedsManualCheck
us;tn.us070s.wpt;TNs255;Relabeled
us;tn.us070s.wpt;TNs171;Relabeled
us;tn.us070s.wpt;TNs266;Relabeled
us;tn.us070s.wpt;TNs102;Demoted
us;tn.us070s.wpt;TNs268;Demoted
us;tn.us070s.wpt;TNs64;Demoted
us;tn.us070s.wpt;TNs145;Relabeled
us;tn.us070s.wpt;TNs380_E;Demoted
us;tn.us070s.wpt;TNs127;Relabeled
us;tn.us070s.wpt;TNs288;Demoted
us;tn.us070s.wpt;TNs136;Demoted
us;tn.us070s.wpt;TNs285;Relabeled
us;tn.us070s.wpt;TNs1;Relabeled
us;tn.us072.wpt;TNs23/57;Demoted
us;tn.us072.wpt;TNs177_S;Relabeled
us;tn.us072.wpt;TNs177_N;Demoted
us;tn.us072.wpt;TNs175;Demoted
us;tn.us072.wpt;TNs196;Demoted
us;tn.us072cha.wpt;TNs156;Demoted
us;tn.us072cha.wpt;TNs2Kim_W;Demoted
us;tn.us072cha.wpt;TNs27;Demoted
us;tn.us072cha.wpt;TNs318;Relabeled
us;tn.us072cha.wpt;TNs148;Demoted
us;tn.us072cha.wpt;TNs17_S;Demoted
us;tn.us074.wpt;TNs74;Demoted
us;tn.us074.wpt;TNs314;Demoted
us;tn.us074.wpt;TNs30;Demoted
us;tn.us076.wpt;TNs17_N;Demoted
us;tn.us078.wpt;TNs277;Demoted
us;tn.us078.wpt;TNs176;Relabeled
us;tn.us078.wpt;TNs175;Demoted
us;tn.us079.wpt;TNs57;Demoted
us;tn.us079.wpt;TNs177;Relabeled
us;tn.us079.wpt;TNs205_S;Demoted
us;tn.us079.wpt;TNs205_N;Demoted
us;tn.us079.wpt;TNs196;Relabeled
us;tn.us079.wpt;TNs222;Relabeled
us;tn.us079.wpt;TNs179;Relabeled
us;tn.us079.wpt;TNs19_E;Relabeled
us;tn.us079.wpt;TNs369;Demoted
us;tn.us079.wpt;TNs88_W;Demoted
us;tn.us079.wpt;TNs88_E;Relabeled
us;tn.us079.wpt;TNs221;Demoted
us;tn.us079.wpt;TNs152;Relabeled
us;tn.us079.wpt;TNs187;Relabeled
us;tn.us079.wpt;TNs186;Relabeled
us;tn.us079.wpt;TNs425;Relabeled
us;tn.us079.wpt;TNs220;Relabeled
us;tn.us079.wpt;TNs105;Relabeled
us;tn.us079.wpt;TNs436;Relabeled
us;tn.us079.wpt;TNs124;Demoted
us;tn.us079.wpt;TNs423;Relabeled
us;tn.us079.wpt;TNs218;Relabeled
us;tn.us079.wpt;TNs356;Relabeled
us;tn.us079.wpt;TNs218_S;Relabeled
us;tn.us079.wpt;TNs218_N;Relabeled
us;tn.us079.wpt;TNs140;Relabeled
us;tn.us079.wpt;TNs119;Demoted
us;tn.us079.wpt;TNs232;Relabeled
us;tn.us079.wpt;TNs120;Demoted
us;tn.us079.wpt;TNs46;Relabeled
us;tn.us079.wpt;TNs233;Relabeled
us;tn.us079.wpt;TNs48_S;Demoted
us;tn.us079.wpt;TNs48_N;Relabeled
us;tn.us127.wpt;TNs283;Relabeled
us;tn.us127.wpt;TNs419;Demoted
us;tn.us127.wpt;TNs298;Demoted
us;tn.us127.wpt;TNs85;Relabeled
us;tn.us127.wpt;TNs296;Relabeled
us;tn.us127.wpt;TNs154;Demoted
us;tn.us127.wpt;TNs325;Demoted
us;tn.us127.wpt;TNs295;Relabeled
us;tn.us129.wpt;TNs336;Relabeled
us;tn.us129.wpt;TNs335;Relabeled
us;tn.us129.wpt;TNs335_Alc;Relabeled
us;tn.us129.wpt;TNs429;Demoted
us;tn.us129.wpt;TNs333;Relabeled
us;tn.us129.wpt;TNs168;Relabeled
us;tn.us231.wpt;TNs275;Relabeled
us;tn.us231.wpt;TNs110;Relabeled
us;tn.us231.wpt;TNs129_E;Demoted
us;tn.us231.wpt;TNs129_W;Demoted
us;tn.us231.wpt;TNs82_N;Relabeled
us;tn.us231.wpt;TNs269_E;Demoted
us;tn.us231.wpt;TNs269_W;Relabeled
us;tn.us231.wpt;TNs268;Relabeled
us;tn.us231.wpt;TNs266;Relabeled
us;tn.us231.wpt;TNs265;Relabeled
us;tn.us231.wpt;TNs260;Relabeled
us;tn.us321.wpt;TNs400;Relabeled
us;tn.us321.wpt;TNs359;Relabeled
us;tn.us321.wpt;TNs67_W;NeedsManualCheck
us;tn.us321.wpt;TNs354;Relabeled
us;tn.us321.wpt;TNs75;Relabeled
us;tn.us321.wpt;TNs351;Relabeled
us;tn.us321.wpt;TNs172;Relabeled
us;tn.us321.wpt;TNs349;Relabeled
us;tn.us321.wpt;TNs340;Relabeled
us;tn.us321.wpt;TNs160;Relabeled
us;tn.us321.wpt;TNs73;Demoted
us;tn.us321.wpt;TNs339_W;Relabeled
us;tn.us321.wpt;TNs32_S;Demoted
us;tn.us321.wpt;TNs416;Relabeled
us;tn.us321.wpt;TNs454;Relabeled
us;tn.us321.wpt;TNs73Sce;Demoted
us;tn.us321.wpt;TNs336;Relabeled
us;tn.us321.wpt;TNs335_N;Relabeled
us;tn.us321.wpt;TNs335_S;Relabeled
us;tn.us321.wpt;TNs333;Relabeled
us;tn.us321.wpt;TNs95_S;Relabeled
us;tn.us321.wpt;TNs444;Demoted
us;tn.us411.wpt;TNs313;Relabeled
us;tn.us411.wpt;TNs314;Demoted
us;tn.us411.wpt;TNs30_E;Demoted
us;tn.us411.wpt;TNs39_W;Relabeled
us;tn.us411.wpt;TNs39_E;Demoted
us;tn.us411.wpt;TNs360;Relabeled
us;tn.us411.wpt;TNs95;Relabeled
us;tn.us411.wpt;TNs336;Relabeled
us;tn.us411.wpt;TNs335;Relabeled
us;tn.us411.wpt;TNs416;Demoted
us;tn.us411.wpt;TNs339;Demoted
us;tn.us412.wpt;TNs210;Relabeled
us;tn.us412.wpt;TNs189;Relabeled
us;tn.us412.wpt;TNs152;Relabeled
us;tn.us412.wpt;TNs188;Relabeled
us;tn.us412.wpt;TNs54/88;Demoted
us;tn.us412.wpt;TNs88;Demoted
us;tn.us412.wpt;TNs88_End;Relabeled
us;tn.us412.wpt;TNs152_Cla;Relabeled
us;tn.us412.wpt;TNs104_N;Relabeled
us;tn.us412.wpt;TNs104/114;Demoted
us;tn.us412.wpt;TNs114_S;Relabeled
us;tn.us412.wpt;TNs202;Demoted
us;tn.us412.wpt;TNs100_W;Demoted
us;tn.us412.wpt;TNs166;Relabeled
us;tn.us421.wpt;TNs67;Demoted
us;tn.us421.wpt;TNs167;Relabeled
us;tn.us421.wpt;TNs418_S;Demoted
us;tn.us421.wpt;TNs91_N;Demoted
us;tn.us421.wpt;TNs91/133;Demoted
us;tn.us421.wpt;TNs44_N;Demoted
us;tn.us421.wpt;TNs435_E;Relabeled
us;tn.us421.wpt;TNs44_S;Relabeled
us;tn.us431.wpt;TNs275;Relabeled
us;tn.us431.wpt;TNs110;Relabeled
us;tn.us431.wpt;TNs244;Relabeled
us;tn.us431.wpt;TNs129/130;Relabeled
us;tn.us431.wpt;TNs129_W;Demoted
us;tn.us431.wpt;TNs271;Relabeled
us;tn.us431.wpt;TNs417;Relabeled
us;tn.us431.wpt;TNs247;Relabeled
us;tn.us431.wpt;TNs248;Demoted
us;tn.us431.wpt;TNs46;Relabeled
us;tn.us431.wpt;TNs45;Demoted
us;tn.us431.wpt;TNs257;Relabeled
us;tn.us431.wpt;TNs161;Relabeled
us;tn.us441.wpt;TNs168;Demoted
us;tn.us441.wpt;TNs33_S;Demoted
us;tn.us441.wpt;TNs62;Demoted
us;tn.us441.wpt;TNs331;Demoted
us;tn.us441.wpt;TNs131;Relabeled
us;tn.us441.wpt;TNs170_W;Demoted
us;tn.us441.wpt;TNs170_E;Demoted
us;tn.us441.wpt;TNs61_E;Demoted
us;tn.us641.wpt;TNs128_E;Demoted
us;tn.us641.wpt;TNs69/114;Relabeled
us;tn.us641.wpt;TNs202_S;Relabeled
us;tn.us641.wpt;TNs202_N;Relabeled
us;tn.us641.wpt;TNs192_S;Relabeled
us;tn.us641.wpt;TNs192_N;Relabeled
us;tn.us641.wpt;TNs69A;Relabeled
us;tn.us641.wpt;TNs77;Relabeled
us;tn.us641.wpt;TNs140_E;Relabeled
us;tn.us641.wpt;TNs140_W;Relabeled
usb;tn.us031altnas.wpt;TNs129_E;Demoted
usb;tn.us031altnas.wpt;TNs129_W;Relabeled
usb;tn.us031altnas.wpt;TNs272_S;Relabeled
usb;tn.us031altnas.wpt;TNs272_N;Relabeled
usb;tn.us031altnas.wpt;TNs271;Relabeled
usb;tn.us031altnas.wpt;TNs270;Demoted
usb;tn.us031altnas.wpt;TNs99_E;Relabeled
usb;tn.us031altnas.wpt;TNs269;Relabeled
usb;tn.us031altnas.wpt;TNs253;Demoted
usb;tn.us031altnas.wpt;TNs255;Demoted
usb;tn.us031altnas.wpt;TNs155;Relabeled
usb;tn.us031busfra.wpt;TNs246;Relabeled
usb;tn.us041altnas.wpt;TNs156;Relabeled
usb;tn.us041altnas.wpt;TNs56;Demoted
usb;tn.us041altnas.wpt;TNs127;Demoted
usb;tn.us041altnas.wpt;TNs279;Relabeled
usb;tn.us041altnas.wpt;TNs269;Demoted
usb;tn.us041altnas.wpt;TNs276;Relabeled
usb;tn.us041altnas.wpt;TNs270;Demoted
usb;tn.us041altnas.wpt;TNs99_W;Relabeled
usb;tn.us041altnas.wpt;TNs99_E;Relabeled
usb;tn.us041altnas.wpt;TNs269_Eag;Relabeled
usb;tn.us041altnas.wpt;TNs253;Relabeled
usb;tn.us041altnas.wpt;TNs255;Relabeled
usb;tn.us041altnas.wpt;TNs155;NeedsManualCheck
usb;tn.us041altnas.wpt;TNs249;Relabeled
usb;tn.us041altnas.wpt;TNs256;Relabeled
usb;tn.us041altnas.wpt;TNs48_N;Demoted
usb;tn.us041altnas.wpt;TNs48_S;Demoted
usb;tn.us041altnas.wpt;TNs236;Relabeled
usb;tn.us041altbypcla.wpt;TNs48;Relabeled
usb;tn.us045ebusmar.wpt;TNs431_W;Relabeled
usb;tn.us045ebusmar.wpt;TNs431_E;Relabeled
usb;tn.us045wbushum.wpt;TNs152;Relabeled
usb;tn.us051busdye.wpt;TNs104Trk;Relabeled
usb;tn.us051busdye.wpt;TNs104_E;Demoted
usb;tn.us051busdye.wpt;TNs104_W;Demoted
usb;tn.us064buswhi.wpt;TNs179_E;Relabeled
usb;tn.us064buswhi.wpt;TNs179_W;Relabeled
usb;tn.us064buswin.wpt;TNs50/130_S;Demoted
usb;tn.us064bypcle.wpt;TNs74;Demoted
usb;tn.us070altgib.wpt;TNs369;Demoted
usb;tn.us070altgib.wpt;TNs88_W;Demoted
usb;tn.us070altgib.wpt;TNs88_E;Relabeled
usb;tn.us070altgib.wpt;TNs221;Relabeled
usb;tn.us070altgib.wpt;TNs152;Relabeled
usb;tn.us070altgib.wpt;TNs187;Relabeled
usb;tn.us070altgib.wpt;TNs186;Relabeled
usb;tn.us070altgib.wpt;TNs425;Relabeled
usb;tn.us070altgib.wpt;TNs220;Relabeled
usb;tn.us070altgib.wpt;TNs220Alt;Relabeled
usb;tn.us070altgib.wpt;TNs105;Relabeled
usb;tn.us070altgib.wpt;TNs436;Relabeled
usb;tn.us070altgib.wpt;TNs77;Relabeled
usb;tn.us070altbyphum.wpt;TNs152;Relabeled
usb;tn.us070buscam.wpt;TNs69A/191;Relabeled
usb;tn.us070buscam.wpt;TNs191_S;Relabeled
usb;tn.us070busdic.wpt;TNs48Bus;Relabeled
usb;tn.us070busdic.wpt;TNs48;Relabeled
usb;tn.us070busleb.wpt;TNs266;Relabeled
usb;tn.us079byphum.wpt;TNs152;Relabeled
usb;tn.us127altcro.wpt;TNs101_S;Relabeled
usb;tn.us127altcro.wpt;TNs101_N;Relabeled
usb;tn.us231busshe.wpt;TNs82_S;Demoted
usb;tn.us321busgre.wpt;TNs350;Relabeled
usb;tn.us412buscol.wpt;TNs243;Relabeled
Title: Re: Tennessee State Highways (usatn)
Post by: Jim on August 23, 2017, 10:26:25 pm
usatn is commented out from tonight's update due to some missing files.  Please see https://github.com/TravelMapping/HighwayData/pull/1552
Title: Re: Tennessee State Highways (usatn)
Post by: Jim on August 23, 2017, 10:27:05 pm
I can abort and restart the update if someone is online now and wants to make a quick fix.
Title: Re: Tennessee State Highways (usatn)
Post by: mapcat on August 23, 2017, 10:27:48 pm
I can do it. Thanks for the alert.

Edit: all 6 files are in the correct directory now.
Title: Re: Tennessee State Highways (usatn)
Post by: Jim on August 23, 2017, 10:29:09 pm
OK, great.  I will hold off on the site update for a bit until I see a new pull come in.
Title: Re: Tennessee State Highways (usatn)
Post by: Jim on August 23, 2017, 11:22:40 pm
usatn now active on site!
Title: Re: Tennessee State Highways (usatn)
Post by: yakra on November 03, 2017, 11:50:40 am
Not really related to usatn at this point...

OK, this is weird. I happened across a glitch in my code after this was all done...

The following code shouldn't have worked...
Quote
        char *FirstAlt = new char[strlen(label[1])];

(I'd think I'd have wanted to do this instead:)
Quote
void demote(char *newPriLbl)
{       char **newLblArray = new char*[NumLabels+1];
        newLblArray[0] = newPriLbl;
        for (unsigned short i=0; i < NumLabels; i++)
                newLblArray[i+1] = label;
        label = newLblArray;
        NumLabels++;
        char *FirstAlt = new char[strlen(label[1])+1];
        strcpy(FirstAlt, "+");
        strcat(FirstAlt, label[1]);
        delete label[1];
        label[1] = FirstAlt;
}
...but it did work. (Was I just smashing the stack without realizing it, with no ill effects?)
From what I saw of the diffs, I saw no glitches at the end of the demoted labels (former primary labels, now the first AltLabels).
Nope. Still wrong.
The new label for FirstAlt needs to be strlen(label[1])+2 characters -- one extra character for the '+' at the beginning, and another extra character for the null-zero terminator. I made this same mistake two other places in the code.
So, I was writing past the end of my arrays all over the place.
I can't believe it worked, and without causing my computer to do goofy things.
If I were writing this now, I'd use C++ style strings...