Author Topic: NY: Point Request (US 11)  (Read 352 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline webny99

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 17
  • Last Login:September 27, 2022, 09:17:47 pm
NY: Point Request (US 11)
« on: August 06, 2022, 07:23:40 pm »
An AAroads regular here but new to the TM forum -

I wanted to request that a new point be added on US 11 in NY between NY392 and NY41_E at Blodgett Mills Rd. It could be called BloMilRd or similar.

More generally I also wanted to ask - is this type of request appropriate, and is this the appropriate place to put it? (I don't want to spam new point requests, but I have noticed some routes have a much lower volume of points than others and that does make it harder to log my travels accurately. For one of the more egregious examples, compare NY414 to nearby NY89 - the former has points almost exclusively at state route junctions, while the latter has points every few miles. I'm curious what makes the difference and how hard it is to add new points. Any insight appreciated!)

Thank you!
« Last Edit: September 04, 2022, 06:03:48 pm by webny99 »

Online Markkos1992

  • TM Collaborator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2579
  • Last Login:Today at 07:47:03 am
Re: NY: US 11 point request
« Reply #1 on: August 07, 2022, 06:27:46 am »
You're good.  The state/region maintainer (in this case yakra) will decide whether or not to include that point.

Offline webny99

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 17
  • Last Login:September 27, 2022, 09:17:47 pm
Re: NY: US 11 point request
« Reply #2 on: August 07, 2022, 11:28:43 am »
OK, thanks!

Another US 11 point suggestion: CR 31/Jennings Creek Rd between NY79_W and NY221.

Like Blodgett Mills Rd, this is a Tioughnioga River crossing, so it's a notable entry/exit point to US 11 from points west.

Offline webny99

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 17
  • Last Login:September 27, 2022, 09:17:47 pm
Re: NY: Point Request (US 11)
« Reply #3 on: September 04, 2022, 06:26:59 pm »
In case there's a chance that the above two point requests will be considered, here are a few more that I would like to submit for consideration:

US9W: between CR10 and US44_E at CR11 (this is an important one as CR11 is an important connector from US 44 EB to the Mid-Hudson Bridge) (41.696565, -73.967269) 
NY3: between NY180 and I-81 at OldRomStaRd (43.969665, -75.986294)
NY22: between JerSt and Dock St at MidRd (bypass of Essex) (44.307194, -73.380887)
NY77: between NY78/98 and US20AltGen at PerRd (42.704827, -78.387899)

Also, is there a standard for if/when points should be included when a route makes a turn or series of turns? NY 93 in Akron, NY 96 in Waterloo, and NY 31 in Clyde all have multiple turns that lack points. NY 93 in particular has 4 turns in a single segment.
« Last Edit: September 09, 2022, 09:08:22 am by webny99 »

Online Markkos1992

  • TM Collaborator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2579
  • Last Login:Today at 07:47:03 am
Re: NY: Point Request (US 11)
« Reply #4 on: September 04, 2022, 07:00:32 pm »
Quote
Also, is there a standard for if/when points should be included when a route makes a turn or series of turns? NY 93 in Akron, NY 96 in Waterloo, and NY 31 in Clyde all have multiple turns that lack points. NY 93 in particular has 4 turns in a single segment.

The only rule is that the routes stay within lateral (within the two red lines in the WP Editor).  For turns in a route, it is otherwise maintainer preference.

Offline Jim

  • TM Collaborator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2423
  • Last Login:Today at 07:36:48 am
Re: NY: Point Request (US 11)
« Reply #5 on: September 05, 2022, 10:09:37 am »
For a little historical perspective related to adding lots of points at turns, in the CHM days as the data was expanding beyond interstates, there was a lot of pressure to use as few points as possible to represent a route reasonably accurately.  It seems that the size of the data was really taxing the front-end implementation and the ability of the back-end servers to handle the amount of data.  TM's implementation has scaled better, and the server that houses the main site has plenty of CPU/storage/memory/network resources.  However, we still try to keep routes from getting unnecessarily dense.  TM routings are, after all, just approximations for the purposes of tracking travels, not for detailed navigation.

Offline webny99

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 17
  • Last Login:September 27, 2022, 09:17:47 pm
Re: NY: Point Request (US 11)
« Reply #6 on: September 05, 2022, 10:53:42 pm »
Thanks, that's helpful context and certainly makes sense. I have noticed that some routes have a higher point density than others, and I don't have an issue with that (I certainly wouldn't expect there to be points at every turn on NY 93, for example). And of course there's always going to be judgment calls when you travel a partial segment. My only objective with the point requests here has been to add common entry/exit points where I could foresee others having the same issue as me, and/or to break up a very long segment.

Offline Jim

  • TM Collaborator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2423
  • Last Login:Today at 07:36:48 am
Re: NY: Point Request (US 11)
« Reply #7 on: September 06, 2022, 07:38:16 am »
My only objective with the point requests here has been to add common entry/exit points where I could foresee others having the same issue as me, and/or to break up a very long segment.

Those are definitely cases where a point make sense.

Offline yakra

  • TM Collaborator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3903
  • Last Login:Yesterday at 07:56:23 pm
Re: NY: Point Request (US 11)
« Reply #8 on: September 08, 2022, 08:09:28 pm »
I wanted to request that a new point be added on US 11 in NY between NY392 and NY41_E at Blodgett Mills Rd. It could be called BloMilRd or similar.
Done. http://github.com/yakra/HighwayData/commit/abe736f65f0a27ddb540e01342d3e4075ba3e02d
By adding another point at Hoxie Gorge Rd, I was able to eliminate the 2 hidden shaping points and keep the overall number of points the same.
And the US11 & I-81 traces don't cross. Yay!
ToDo: check out the rest of the items mentioned in other posts in this thread.

I have noticed some routes have a much lower volume of points than others and that does make it harder to log my travels accurately. For one of the more egregious examples, compare NY414 to nearby NY89 - the former has points almost exclusively at state route junctions, while the latter has points every few miles. I'm curious what makes the difference
https://travelmapping.net/devel/manual/includepts.php outlines what points should be included in a route. Basically, interchanges, other highways in TM, and then other major highways.
BloMilRd arguably meets the Connections to a nearby bridge over a large creek or medium/large river (not a small creek) large enough to noticeably restrict the number of bridges that cross it criterion (Creek? River? Large? Medium? Small?). Since it's (I assume) needed, in it goes -- even if it's not necessary for shaping along with HoxGorRd. ;)
After that, shaping points are added as needed to keep the shape of the route within lateral tolerance, as Markkos1992 mentioned above. So with NY89 being a curvier route than NY414, it gets more of these points.

Also, is there a standard for if/when points should be included when a route makes a turn or series of turns? NY 93 in Akron, NY 96 in Waterloo, and NY 31 in Clyde all have multiple turns that lack points. NY 93 in particular has 4 turns in a single segment.
These are all short, minor turns, and there's not really much ambiguity in most cases looking at the OSM tiles as to where the route goes. Adding them would start to make maps overly dense and clutter up the HB without providing much benefit for travelers, so they're left out.

The only rule is that the routes stay within lateral (within the two red lines in the WP Editor).  For turns in a route, it is otherwise maintainer preference.
My take on the manual is that, beyond keeping the route trace within tolerance, this is somewhat discouraged:
If the route has sharp turns or switchbacks and adding a few more shaping points there would significantly improve the trace, consider adding a few more, but be conservative.
(Emphasis added.)

For a little historical perspective related to adding lots of points at turns, in the CHM days as the data was expanding beyond interstates, there was a lot of pressure to use as few points as possible to represent a route reasonably accurately.  It seems that the size of the data was really taxing the front-end implementation and the ability of the back-end servers to handle the amount of data.  TM's implementation has scaled better, and the server that houses the main site has plenty of CPU/storage/memory/network resources.  However, we still try to keep routes from getting unnecessarily dense.  TM routings are, after all, just approximations for the purposes of tracking travels, not for detailed navigation.
To add onto this, where TM's front end can slow down is in mapview, and the maps on the user pages. All the points are transferred to the client machine -- as text JavaScript IIUC -- and then parsed and rendered by Leaflet. If there are a lot of points/segments in a given system/region/area being viewed, the process can get bogged down & really take a while. To that end, IMO keeping the number of points to a minimum is still good practice.

CHM OTOH didn't have the interactive maps that TM does. Instead, it generated GIFs via PHP. My memory is that these were darn quick to generate, maybe even near-instantaneous, but that memory is fading. But still, the same principle applies to some extent -- more points & more segments = more CPU juice to generate the maps. With a lot of server requests, that could add up, maybe? Wonder how much a concern that was for Tim, server-side...
Sri Syadasti Syadavaktavya Syadasti Syannasti Syadasti Cavaktavyasca Syadasti Syannasti Syadavatavyasca Syadasti Syannasti Syadavaktavyasca

Offline webny99

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 17
  • Last Login:September 27, 2022, 09:17:47 pm
Re: NY: Point Request (US 11)
« Reply #9 on: September 09, 2022, 08:41:52 am »
I wanted to request that a new point be added on US 11 in NY between NY392 and NY41_E at Blodgett Mills Rd. It could be called BloMilRd or similar.
Done. http://github.com/yakra/HighwayData/commit/abe736f65f0a27ddb540e01342d3e4075ba3e02d
By adding another point at Hoxie Gorge Rd, I was able to eliminate the 2 hidden shaping points and keep the overall number of points the same.
And the US11 & I-81 traces don't cross. Yay!

Great, thank you! All the better that US 11 and I-81 don't cross! (And yes, it will be in use since I used it to access US11 from Greek Peak  :D)


I have noticed some routes have a much lower volume of points than others and that does make it harder to log my travels accurately. For one of the more egregious examples, compare NY414 to nearby NY89 - the former has points almost exclusively at state route junctions, while the latter has points every few miles. I'm curious what makes the difference
https://travelmapping.net/devel/manual/includepts.php outlines what points should be included in a route. Basically, interchanges, other highways in TM, and then other major highways.
BloMilRd arguably meets the Connections to a nearby bridge over a large creek or medium/large river (not a small creek) large enough to noticeably restrict the number of bridges that cross it criterion (Creek? River? Large? Medium? Small?). Since it's (I assume) needed, in it goes -- even if it's not necessary for shaping along with HoxGorRd. ;)
After that, shaping points are added as needed to keep the shape of the route within lateral tolerance, as Markkos1992 mentioned above. So with NY89 being a curvier route than NY414, it gets more of these points.

Thanks for the link about point inclusion! Hadn't seen that yet. That makes sense when you put it like that. If there will be points regardless. they might as well be waypoints.


Also, is there a standard for if/when points should be included when a route makes a turn or series of turns? NY 93 in Akron, NY 96 in Waterloo, and NY 31 in Clyde all have multiple turns that lack points. NY 93 in particular has 4 turns in a single segment.
These are all short, minor turns, and there's not really much ambiguity in most cases looking at the OSM tiles as to where the route goes. Adding them would start to make maps overly dense and clutter up the HB without providing much benefit for travelers, so they're left out.

Makes sense. I definitely don't think points are needed at all the turns on NY93, but was just curious.

I will note (and I believe Markkos1992 has noted this elsewhere) that NY 31 in Clyde has a very short overlap with NY 414, so that one may be worth adding a point for.
« Last Edit: September 09, 2022, 09:16:39 am by webny99 »

Offline webny99

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 17
  • Last Login:September 27, 2022, 09:17:47 pm
Re: NY: Point Request (US 11)
« Reply #10 on: September 20, 2022, 06:17:40 pm »
Another US 11 point suggestion: CR 31/Jennings Creek Rd between NY79_W and NY221.
...here are a few more that I would like to submit for consideration:

US9W: between CR10 and US44_E at CR11 (this is an important one as CR11 is an important connector from US 44 EB to the Mid-Hudson Bridge) (41.696565, -73.967269) 
NY3: between NY180 and I-81 at OldRomStaRd (43.969665, -75.986294)
NY22: between JerSt and Dock St at MidRd (bypass of Essex) (44.307194, -73.380887)
NY77: between NY78/98 and US20AltGen at PerRd (42.704827, -78.387899)

Adding one more on to the list:

NY 36 at CR64 (Perry Rd) between ParkRd and US20AltGen_E (42.756331, -77.884670)

This is an important one because it's used as a connector between NY36 and US20A for traffic between Buffalo and the Southern Tier. In fact it is part of the fastest Buffalo-NYC route, so it definitely meets the criterion of serving regional travelers!