Travel Mapping
Highway Data Discussion => In-progress Highway Systems & Work => Topic started by: Spinoza on June 28, 2017, 04:19:36 am
-
Hi,
if you'll ever want to implement Italian Strada Statale (SS) network into the site, ANAS (State owned managing company) has released its complete registry:
http://www.stradeanas.it/it/le-strade/anas-regione
It is divided by region and it shows all the roads currently nominated SS.
Edited to pluralise name of system
-
Excellent, thanks.
-
@Spinoza: We currently work on splitting some European regions like it's already done for USA, Canada, China, Mexico,... The first step is splitting Spain, then Germany, so that we can add the next tier 5 level systems afterwards. We will break user list files once this will go live. For that reason, I think we should make all splits at once. I think if we ever wanna add the next Italian system - I guess it's SP -, I think we also have to spilt Italy into regions. For that reason, it's fine, that ANAS has divided the map into regions. Is there also any info about SP routes? Generally, what do you think about adding them somewhere down the road (2018, 2019, 2020,...)?
Sorry, again, I just wanna do the split action only once to bother our users only once....
-
I think if we ever wanna add the next Italian system - I guess it's SP -, I think we also have to spilt Italy into regions. For that reason, it's fine, that ANAS has divided the map into regions. Is there also any info about SP routes? Generally, what do you think about adding them somewhere down the road (2018, 2019, 2020,...)?
https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strada_regionale - It's SR (though they seem rare). SP are another layer down!
-
@Spinoza: We currently work on splitting some European regions like it's already done for USA, Canada, China, Mexico,... The first step is splitting Spain, then Germany, so that we can add the next tier 5 level systems afterwards. We will break user list files once this will go live. For that reason, I think we should make all splits at once. I think if we ever wanna add the next Italian system - I guess it's SP -, I think we also have to spilt Italy into regions. For that reason, it's fine, that ANAS has divided the map into regions. Is there also any info about SP routes? Generally, what do you think about adding them somewhere down the road (2018, 2019, 2020,...)?
Sorry, again, I just wanna do the split action only once to bother our users only once....
si404 is right, SR is between SS and SP, but to make things worse, they are not present in all the Italian regions. The only regions to allow such denomination are Abruzzo, Umbria, Toscana, Lazio, Piemonte, Friuli-Venezia Giulia, Veneto and Puglia.
Another layer of complication, due to the particular legal status of Provinces Trento and Bolzano/Südtirol (which have simultaneous rights of provinces, regions and state), the SS are managed by the provinces but retain their original SS denomination.
As for provincial roads (SP) it should be easy to find out the former SS which are now managed by provinces... but the original SP, which have never been SS, are somewhat harder to identify. I guess some provinces mantain a comprehensive list of them, some others don't...
Italy's a mess...
-
Another layer of complication, due to the particular legal status of Provinces Trento and Bolzano/Südtirol (which have simultaneous rights of provinces, regions and state), the SS are managed by the provinces but retain their original SS denomination.
As for provincial roads (SP) it should be easy to find out the former SS which are now managed by provinces... but the original SP, which have never been SS, are somewhat harder to identify. I guess some provinces mantain a comprehensive list of them, some others don't...
Do you think it would be easier to split Italy into regions (= provinces)?
This way we could:
- Add SP or SR routes depending on the province
- Draft provinces which have data published and omit other provinces (first)
- Bypass the Trentino-Alto Adige "issue"
-
If we want to split Italy into subdivisions, I think that street-wise provinces are more interesting than regions but I guess we should use both layers.
Another layer of complication, due to the particular legal status of Provinces Trento and Bolzano/Südtirol (which have simultaneous rights of provinces, regions and state), the SS are managed by the provinces but retain their original SS denomination.
As for provincial roads (SP) it should be easy to find out the former SS which are now managed by provinces... but the original SP, which have never been SS, are somewhat harder to identify. I guess some provinces mantain a comprehensive list of them, some others don't...
Do you think it would be easier to split Italy into regions (= provinces)?
This way we could:
- Add SP or SR routes depending on the province
- Draft provinces which have data published and omit other provinces (first)
- Bypass the Trentino-Alto Adige "issue"
-
The ISO 3166-2 code for the 20 regions (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ISO_3166-2:IT) is using numbers instead of characters though, e.g. IT-32 for Trentino-Alto Adige.
Characters are only used for the 110 provinces, e.g. IT-AG, but I think that's not the way we should go.
-
The ISO 3166-2 code for the 20 regions (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ISO_3166-2:IT) is using numbers instead of characters though, e.g. IT-32 for Trentino-Alto Adige.
Characters are only used for the 110 provinces, e.g. IT-AG, but I think that's not the way we should go.
Why not?
-
Why not?
Why not IT-32 or why not 110 provinces?
I think the cryptic code with numbers is not user-friendly.
No need to think about regions or provinces now because Si has decided that we don't split Italy now:
I'm not going to split Italy - looking at how dense the SS roads are (and how they are hard work), I have no plans for itasr - we can always split it at some point in the distant future if necessary.
-
I've got Sardinia drafted, and have begun work on Sicilian routes.
I've fudged some of the places where routes disappear either side of a town, but there's an applied route. However I've kept places where a route is fragmented due to changing number (eg SS125/SS125Var) - in part to highlight how annoying the Italian numbering system can be!
-
I thought you meant your are not going to use the province codes.
I agree you shouldn't use numbers for regions... there are already unofficial three-letter codes there are sometimes used (e.g. SAR for Sardinia, TAA for Trentino Alto Adige, MAR for Marches and so on...)
Why not?
Why not IT-32 or why not 110 provinces?
I think the cryptic code with numbers is not user-friendly.
No need to think about regions or provinces now because Si has decided that we don't split Italy now:
I'm not going to split Italy - looking at how dense the SS roads are (and how they are hard work), I have no plans for itasr - we can always split it at some point in the distant future if necessary.
-
First patch of routes from the south is available now: http://tm.teresco.org/hb/index.php?sys=itass :)
-
I now have almost routes south of Rome done, as well as routes in the NW and far NE.
-
Great job guys. I can hardly wait to add some new clinched roads :D
-
ANAS is in the process of regaining ownership of some roads previously transferred to Regions and Provinces.
Here's the list:
http://www.stradeanas.it/it/conferenza-unificata-libera-al-trasferimento-ad-anas-di-oltre-3500-km-rete-nazionale-e-regionale
Not sure when the actual transfer will take place.
-
There were (I've only really got the North left to do) various routes in Marche (in particular) that ANAS listed, but didn't have a trace on and had descriptions like "SS456: from ex SS123" with SS123's listing having "from exSS456". I added a couple of them that were more major, even though mapping had them as SR routes, while left the ones I found it hard to trace. However these all seem to be coming back.
I believe Trentino-Sud-Tyrol signs the SS routes its provinces maintain as SS roads, rather than not having any.
And the whole creation of routes would be so much easier if they didn't break every time there was a newish bypass that had a bannered route (mostly Var) or - in the case of SS9 that I did last night - were discontinuous at every town of size mostly because of bypasses in the SS7xx range.
-
I believe Trentino-Sud-Tyrol signs the SS routes its provinces maintain as SS roads, rather than not having any.
This is true, Trentino and Alto-Adige are autonomous regions, and have a lot of state-like competences. The SS routes there are still named as such, and basically are, even though they are managed by the autonomous provinces.
And the whole creation of routes would be so much easier if they didn't break every time there was a newish bypass that had a bannered route (mostly Var) or - in the case of SS9 that I did last night - were discontinuous at every town of size mostly because of bypasses in the SS7xx range.
Amen to that...
-
"It ass" is a very good description for this system (is Italian Road Numbering the worst in the EU?), but I 'only' have 50 routes left (unless I find yet more hiding in TAA), so it's almost there with the current lot (obviously there's the new bunch mentioned upthread) and I expect to be finished in the next couple of days.
-
(is Italian Road Numbering the worst in the EU?)
You've not yet completed grceo...
-
Greece's isn't as bad - the issues I've found are more to do with alphabet, mountains, and most importantly: poor signage and mapping.
Italy's is logical, reasonably well signed, and most importantly: utterly crazy in its fastidiousness for the rules. This means SS routes going through towns and over passes while the province has bypassed it with a high quality SP road, or routes breaking because they haven't gone and fixed all the chainage markers downstream of an improvement so its SS123-SS123 Var-SS123.
Spain's Autovia/pista numbering comes a very close second with the prefix proliferation, but it doesn't have the annoying features Italy has, save on rare occasion - its sins are different.
-
SS49 wayppint SS49_S should be renamed to SS49bis. The E66 wp should also be renamed.
-
The end waypoint of SS77Fol should be renamed SS3 instead of SS3Bis.
Also, SS16 dir/b near Ancona (Marche) is missing from the list.
-
SS16 dir/b
dir/b :o really?
-
It's the second Dir route, so 'b'. I deliberately left it off in the hopes that no one would miss this short route that doesn't connect to any other. However I've done it now.
-
SS1:
New wp @SP128 http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=42.471907&lon=11.235634
New wp @SP105 http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=42.356035&lon=11.591810
SP104 wp is off track and nothing intersects here, it's the beginning of the new A12 section
SS1bis:
Why is it not called by a csv entry?
It ends in Vetrala according to OSM/GM
SS675 wp label is not perfect because SS675 is u/c to be extended to the west by 2018. There will be a new SS675 exit/wp at a different location
SS1civ:
I think it ends anywhere in Roma, see OSM and GSV (https://www.google.com/maps/@41.8894711,12.4109196,3a,15y,315.6h,94.32t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1saOAYybCGQjdQFPeCUGyPSw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)
New wp @SP15b http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=41.923027&lon=12.188934
GSJ @ http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=41.935994&lon=12.133386
Shouldn't SS698 being extended to SS1 ViaIso wp?
SS1dir:
fine
SSdirGri:
fine
SS1liv:
SP9 should be moved to the junction
SP4Bis or SP4bis ? It's a general issue...
FILI --> SGCFirLiv
FIPI --> SGCFirPisa
A11 --> A11_S
A15 should be moved to http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=44.133793&lon=9.899368
Please add a shape point to A15 south of the exit because both routes look like being concurrent on mapview
SS1rac:
Should be SS1racc with double c?
I tried to find signs on GSV but I couldn't fine one. Should it be removed?
SS1rap:
fine
SS1sav:
Is ViaSanGla really necessary?
SP8_W should be moved to the roundabout
Is ViaGiaCoz really necessary?
Is CorAugMom really necessary?
See SSvarvar for wp label (name)
SS1var:
See SS1Rac for wp label (name)
Shoud it be var/a?
SS1varvar:
IS SSvarvar really signed? It's not indicated on OSM/GM and I couldn*t find a sign on GSV
-
SS3:
GSJ @ http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=43.014026&lon=12.748003
New wp @ http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=42.923227&lon=12.727693
SS675/E45:
Concurrency is broken twice
SS3bis (and concurrent E45):
SP7_C wp must be moved to the interchange
Exceeds limits b/n SP138_C and ViaPonSor
ViaBas --> SR221?
Not sure if SS219 should be repositioned but SP175_N, StrBra, SP175_S, SS318_N, ViaVal, ViaTra, SP375_N, SP375_S, SP400, ViaTab and ViaRis must be repositioned
SS3nar:
Are you sure about the northern end? OSM and GM indicate it up to SS79/SS675. I had a quick look and found signs at a roundabount in Terni (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.5587784,12.6559925,3a,15y,183.21h,86.19t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sOuTMmWrmmFRPrQnnxz1_NQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)
SS4:
Exceeds limits b/n SS685 and SP61
Bac_W: The exit is called "Sud" (South)
SS4dir:
Fine
SS4:
Source? It is not indicated on GM, SP236 on OSM but a SS4 sign (I guess an old sign or meaning "to") on October 2016 GSV (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.8443252,13.6341048,3a,15y,148.31h,91.43t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sI0QSslsv7qErIwfYvO0TUA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656). I found remove the route if there is no other evidence. I even found SS16/SS18 here: November 2014 GSV (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.8495462,13.6339744,3a,37.5y,108.57h,84.8t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1syy9diCt08yXXDzu1ZJOapg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) but there is only SS4 and SS81...
-
Some basic general response to these review points before I look at specifics.
My source for endpoints/route existence is the ANAS directory of routes. As such, there are some odd ends and unsigned routes. Signage in Italy is often misleading as to whether it the road number is a 'to', or the actual number, or just outdated. I'll happily extend a short distance to a logical endpoint (eg through a town to another route) if there is a sign.
Rac is indeed Racc, but there's a 3-character Banner limit and 'SPUR' banners have always been Spr and Racc banners have always been Rac
-
Linguistic nitpick here: the name of the system should be Strade Statale - the noun and adjective need to match in number and gender. :)
Una Strada Statala
Due Strade Statale
"Strada Statale" is a singular noun with a plural adjective.
-
Linguistic nitpick here: the name of the system should be Strade Statale - the noun and adjective need to match in number and gender. :)
Una Strada Statala
Due Strade Statale
"Strada Statale" is a singular noun with a plural adjective.
Mmm, not really.
The correct forms are: "Una strada statale", "due strade statali". In Italian, noun-adjective concordance does not always mean same ending.
"Una rosa gialla" and "due rose gialle"
but
"Una rosa verde" and "due rose verdi"
It seems there are some other national roads, specified in the ANAS website, which are not in this database.
For instance, NSA 12 di Verrone, NSA 357 della Val Vigezzo, both in region Piemonte. Since I drove NSA 12, I noticed its absence.
-
SS5 + SS5Ori + SS5Qua:
Fine
SS6:
+X828144 could be removed
SS6Dir:
Fine
SS7 + SS7Cas:
I minimum saw a sign in the roundabout at the current SS7 end. It's confirmed by OSM and GM and routes could be merged but ANAS says NO!
SS7Ben:
SS7_S --> RA9_xxx
GSJ @ http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=40.879212&lon=14.986811
New wp @ http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=40.735161&lon=15.497144
Extends to Potenza according to GSV, GM and OSM but not by ANAS. I should check ANAS first next time...
SS7DirBor:
Couldn't find any "SS7Bis" sign on OSM/GM/GSV (only OSM "SS7quarter")
Remaining SS7xxx:
All fine
-
A bit late to the party here.
Italy is the first I've been aware (http://tm.teresco.org/forum/index.php?topic=2325.msg8630#msg8630) of banners being used outside of North America. (Is there anywhere else?)
The standard in North America has been for every bannered route to have both a City and Abbrev. I like the idea of, for consistency's sake, expanding that to be a sitewide standard. (Not saying there's no way in Centralia you'd convince me otherwise though.)
Similarly, in itaa.csv, maybe
itaa;ITA;A18;Dir;;Diramazione per Catania;ita.a018dircat;A18Cat
->
itaa;ITA;A18;Dir;Cat;Diramazione per Catania;ita.a018dircat;A18Dir,A18Cat
...and the .list name would match the route root.
--There are some cases of unique Route+Banner combinations still having a City & Abbrev, E.G ita.ss027vargig.
Consistency would dictate either losing the City & Abbrev, or adding City & Abbrev to all bannered routes. Again, I prefer the latter approach.
-
(Is there anywhere else?)
I use ALT banner in combination with city names in Germany (3+3 characters)
http://tm.teresco.org/forum/index.php?topic=289
-
SS9Dir:
There is no corresponding SS472 route to SS472 waypoint
SS9Fid:
New wp west of Pontenure (junction to bypass)
SS9For:
SP9? Is it signed anywhere? OSM/GM do not indicate it.
Other SS9 routes:
Fine
-
What happened withe the italian SS? It dissappeared from the highway browser.
-
Making bannered routes conform with the rest of the site created loads of errors. I've got a fixed ready to be inputted, so it'll be back tomorrow hopefully.
-
I'll continue the peer-review once itass will be back and graphs will be updated in a week or so (http://tm.teresco.org/forum/index.php?topic=1904.msg8794#msg8794).
-
@si404 if you can get the pull request in soon (before about 2:15 EST) I can run an extra update to get this system back in the DB. That would allow me to include graph generation one more time since my students are unlikely to have started working with any graphs yet on the new assignment they just got a couple hours ago.
-
No need to rush! I just wanted Si to know that I'll continue soon. It's (shortcut of it ass) is less painful than the next system on my list... korex... Maybe I should continue with svkii or svnr.
-
Don't worry about graph creation and the like - the addition of NSA routes (basically unnumbered SS roads that have been numbered with something else) is going to occupy me on this system for a while.
As for peer review - I don't mind if you do continue reviewing itass, but would love korex to be done. As a motorway system with (mostly) numbered exits it is much less of an ass than itass, IMO, plus not doing itass allows me to look at signage and add NSA routes and such like.
-
NSA routes (basically unnumbered SS roads that have been numbered with something else)
A system of unnumbered routes? Another tier 4 or tier 5?
-
A system of unnumbered routes? Another tier 4 or tier 5?
They are Strada Statale, just not having SS numbers yet (or detrunked yet if heading the other direction), so they are going in itass just as all the green-hexagon roads are in itaa, even if they aren't Axx.
-
A system of unnumbered routes? Another tier 4 or tier 5?
They are Strada Statale, just not having SS numbers yet (or detrunked yet if heading the other direction), so they are going in itass just as all the green-hexagon roads are in itaa, even if they aren't Axx.
https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strade_statali_in_Italia
NSA (nuova strada ANAS), strade in attesa di classificazione
Google translated:
NSA (new road ANAS), roads waiting for classification
Sounds similar to future US interstates but there are also "ex" NSA routes. Former SS routes are "future" SS routes now.... ;D
I guess it will be a tier 5 system?
https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuova_strada_ANAS
-
I think you guys should seriously put a changelog every time you modify route names... now I found myself with a bunch of Italy SS roads with different names and cannot understand what they changed into...
-
Sorry, that's my fault. We have a system that keeps old route names to save people changing them and I didn't employ it. I too need to go and fix my .list file too.
We have a change log for active systems, but not for preview ones, which we do warn that "These may still undergo significant changes without notification." on the front page.
-
It's always possible to track down changes on GitHub, even for preview systems. For instance, the latest itass route name changes can be found here (https://github.com/TravelMapping/HighwayData/commit/8c7d2259c65b66301f3e9cc986e5fbfdffd2cfd9#diff-aca2f4dac82a022c7b889edf4c56feaf).
@Spinoza: If you are not sure, just ask here and I could try to figure out what you have to change.
============================
General note:
Yes, systems are sometimes very long in preview and undergo a lot of changes, e.g. deub, my first system drafted. I had to learn how to draft systems.
I don't think that we should indicate these changes on the site. That's only done for active systems (http://tm.teresco.org/devel/updates.php) and the list is already quite long. I think we should try to activate systems earlier. More than 1 year is just too much...
-
Thank you, I didn't realize itass was still in preview. It makes more sense.
It's always possible to track down changes on GitHub, even for preview systems. For instance, the latest itass route name changes can be found here (https://github.com/TravelMapping/HighwayData/commit/8c7d2259c65b66301f3e9cc986e5fbfdffd2cfd9#diff-aca2f4dac82a022c7b889edf4c56feaf).
1
@Spinoza: If you are not sure, just ask here and I could try to figure out what you have to change.
============================
General note:
Yes, systems are sometimes very long in preview and undergo a lot of changes, e.g. deub, my first system drafted. I had to learn how to draft systems.
I don't think that we should indicate these changes on the site. That's only done for active systems (http://tm.teresco.org/devel/updates.php) and the list is already quite long. I think we should try to activate systems earlier. More than 1 year is just too much...
-
Starting next July 3500 km of regional and provincial roads are going to be transferred to the state (ANAS). If I can find a comprehensive list I will post it here.
-
Starting next July 3500 km of regional and provincial roads are going to be transferred to the state (ANAS). If I can find a comprehensive list I will post it here.
This is the official list of roads that are in the process of being transferred back to ANAS:
http://www.stradeanas.it/it/le-strade/rientro-strade
For now, only roads in Liguria have been effectively transferred back, starting 1st August:
http://www.stradeanas.it/sites/default/files/pdf/REGIONE%20LIGURIA%20-%20STRADE%20DA%20RICLASSIFICARE_20180731.pdf
-
SS83 is not just 5 km: the whole 81 km of it is Strada Statale.
-
Starting 1st October 2018, 240 km of regional and provincial roads in region Umbria will be re-dedicated as Strada Statale:
Provincial roads:
SP 169 del Pantano, SP 170/2 di Maestrello and SP 172/1 di Corciano which are part of route Pierantonio-San Giovanni del Pantano-Mantignana (20.6 km overall)
Regional roads:
SR3 Flaminia (21.3 km from Fossato di Vico and border with Marche)
SR71 Umbro Casentinese (96 km from border with Lazio to border with Toscana)
SR74 Maremmana (10.5 km from border with Lazio to junction with SR71)
SR146 di Chianciano (0.67 km near border with Toscana)
SR209 Valnerina (29.2 km from Terni to Sant'Anatolia di Narco)
SR320 di Cascia (12.2 km from Cascia to junction with SS685)
SR361 Septempedana (10.5 km from Nocera Umbria to junction with SS3)
SR418 Spoletina (16.4 km from Acquasparta to San Giovanni di Baiano)
SR452 della Contessa (9.5 km from Gubbio to border with Marche)
SR471 di Leonessa (15.7 km from border with Lazio to junction with SS685)
Conversely, some SS roads are transferred to region Umbria:
SS77 Val di Chienti and SS3318 di Valfabbrica (the old routes bypassed by the new expressways which replaced them), 45 km overall.
https://www.perugiatoday.it/attualita/strade-umbria-gestione-anas-mappa.html
-
Also starting 1st October, 150 km of provincial roads in region Molise will be transferred back to ANAS to become Strada Statale (SS).
In Province Isernia:
SP1 (ex SS627) and SP1/var "della Vandra"
In Province Campobasso:
Tangenziale Est of Campobasso
SP "Fondo Valle Rivolo"
SP154 (ex SS87) "Sant'Elia"
SP40 "Adriatica"
SP146 "Falcionina"
SP166 "dei Tre Titoli"
SP159 "Stazione Bonefro-Valle del Biferno"
SP163 (ex SS157) "della Valle del Biferno"
SP139 "Fossaltina"
SP138 "Fossalto-Pietracupa"
SP "Comunità montana"
SP41 "Garibaldi"
SP15 "Trignina"
SP77 "Chietina"
Conversely, some state roads will be demoted to provincial:
To Province Isernia:
some stretches of SS85 "Venafrana" and SS158
To Province Campobasso:
stretches of SS647/dir B "Fondo valle del Biferno", SS645, SS212 "della Val Fortore", SS87 Sannitica", NSA 366, NSA 340, NSA 278, NSA 365, NSA 395
Unfortunately not even ANAS is more precise.
http://www.stradeanas.it/it/molise-dal-1%C2%B0-ottobre-passano-gestione-ad-anas-150-km-di-strade-provinciali
-
Most of Italian Autostrada routes (active itaa system) do not have numbered exits but use wp label names of crossing routes. Of course, many exits are called "SSxxx". It seems to be right according to OSM and to what's signed in the field but we do not have the SS routes in HB. Just an example: RA13 exit SS14 (http://travelmapping.net/hb/index.php?u=michih&r=ita.ra013). This SS14 segment is not in HB!
Is it ok or should the wp labels being changed? Or should the SS routes being drafted?
-
Most of Italian Autostrada routes (active itaa system) do not have numbered exits but use wp label names of crossing routes. Of course, many exits are called "SSxxx". It seems to be right according to OSM and to what's signed in the field but we do not have the SS routes in HB. Just an example: RA13 exit SS14 (http://travelmapping.net/hb/index.php?u=michih&r=ita.ra013). This SS14 segment is not in HB!
Is it ok or should the wp labels being changed? Or should the SS routes being drafted?
In that particular instance, the road USED TO be SS14 but now is classified as SR14. Problem is that many times, on the downgraded route, signs are not changed. OSM itself shows that route as both SS14 and SR14.
In my opinion, the wp labels at motorway intersection should be named as the official exit name, in this case "Sistiana".
-
In my opinion, the wp labels at motorway intersection should be named as the official exit name, in this case "Sistiana".
I agree but it doesn't match our rules :) I think it should be SR14.
-
SS38VarDel has been extended from its current end in Cosio Valtellino to a roundabout after Morbegno.
-
Starting last 17 November, 553 km of Provincial and Regional roads in region Tuscany are assigned to ANAS (itass):
- 2 "Cassia" for 80.2 km, from Latium border to Siena sud;
- 65 "della Futa", for 57 km from Florence to Emilia-Romagna border;
- 66 "Pistoiese" for 27.1 km from junction to SS716 to San Marcello Pistoiese (junction to SS12);
- 68 "di Val Cecina" for 63 km from Cecina to Poggibonsi (junction to RA3), excluding stretches inside Cecina and Colle Val d'Elsa;
- 71 "Umbro Casentinese Romagnola", for 1 km from Umbria border to junction to RA6;
- 146 "di Chianciano" for 46.4 km from Umbria border to junction to SS2 in San Quirico d'Orcia;
- 330 "di Buonviaggio" for 2.9 km from Liguria border to junction to SS62 in Caprigliola;
- 398 "di Val di Cornia" for 36.3 km from junction to SS439 to junction to SS1 in Campiglia Marittima;
- 439 "Sarzanese-Val d'Era" for 157.1 km from Follonica to Pietrasanta excluding stretches inside Pietrasanta, Lucca, Pontedera and Ponsacco;
- 439var "Variante di Pontedera and Ponsacco" for 12.5 km from junction to SS67 to Ponsacco;
- 439dir for 16.8 km from junction to SS439 in San Michele to junction to SS68 in Roncolla;
- 665 "Massese" for 28.4 km from Emilia-Romagna border to junction to SS62 near Aulla;
- provincial 719 "Prato-Pistoia" for 24 km from A1 Prato/Calenzano to junction to SS716 in Pistoia.
http://www.stradeanas.it/it/toscana-tornano-gestione-anas-553-chilometri-di-ex-strade-statali
-
Having received no feedback I'm not sure if my updates here are useful...
-
They are, just that this system is a whole lot of mess right now that I need a big block of time to sort out.
-
Dottore Spinoza, your comments are always welcomed :)
-
Thank you, I didn't mean no pressure... :D
-
Starting last November, 87 km of provincial roads in region Basilicata were transferred to ANAS and are now Strada Statale:
- SP13 della Valle del Sarmento for 8 km, from junction with SS653 to junction with SP29;
- SP29 Valsinni-Noepoli for 0.9 km, from junction with SP13 to junction with SP155;
- SP148 Melfi-Leonessa for 10.6 km, from Melfi to Leonessa;
- SP149 Melfi-Sata for 10 km, from junction with SP148 to junction with SP158;
- SP155 Sarmentana for 5.4 km, from junction with SS92 to junction with SP158;
- SP158 Sinnica-Sarmentana for 5.8 km, from junction with SS653 to junction with SP155;
- SP Bradanica for 10.572 km, from junction to SS655 near S.Maria d'Irsi to junction with SS7 near Matera;
- SP Nerico-Bella Muro for 33.6 km, from junction with SS401 in Nerico to junction with SS7 in Bella Muro
- SP Svincolo di Tito for 2.172 km, near retail area Tito.
https://www.stradeanas.it/sites/default/files/pdf/REGIONE%20BASILICATA%20-%20STRADE%20DA%20RICLASSIFICARE.pdf
-
Starting next 1st January, 283 km of roads in region Calabria will be trasferred to ANAS (itass system).
https://www.stradeanas.it/sites/default/files/pdf/REGIONE%20CALABRIA%20-%20STRADE%20DA%20RICLASSIFICARE.pdf
list is inside the pdf file.
-
E74/SS231 concurrency is broken in Bra.
-
SS27 Variney end point is labeled "T2" but there is no T2 in HB. T2 is signed (https://www.google.com/maps/@45.7422711,7.3831781,3a,15y,353.61h,95.44t/data=!3m9!1e1!3m7!1s2Scj9juqat7wArDofv_Kww!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!9m2!1b1!2i36) though*
*Edit: Which means... nothing. Italy often signs route numbers from anywhere down the road.
-
Concurrency between SS49 and E66 is broken in Innichen.
-
New routes in the SS742 to SS752 range: https://www.skyscrapercity.com/showpost.php?p=161141324&postcount=11330
-
Is the update of ITASS stopped?
I reported SS83 almost a year ago... (not to mention all the roads which are transferred back to ANAS)
Just to know
-
(not to mention all the roads which are transferred back to ANAS)
You've only reported lists for some regions. Is the "list" complete? And is the administrative decision final or are there still changes to be expected?
-
I was going to do all the changes, including construction and proof reading and tweaks and all that in one big go when all the changes from renumbering routes died down. It's basically going to be a redo of the whole system.
Probably in the fall, but as michih has said, not all regions have lists of transferred routes yet.
-
I didn't write that but asked whether all regions have published lists.
And, is the ANAS map (https://www.stradeanas.it/it/le-strade/anas-regione) already updated?
-
I didn't write that but asked whether all regions have published lists.
sorry yes, though without an answer to whether the relevant ones have all updated, there's little point in overhauling the system.And, is the ANAS map (https://www.stradeanas.it/it/le-strade/anas-regione) already updated?
that will be useful. Can't easily check on my phone.
-
Sure, the question was to spinoza ;)
-
(not to mention all the roads which are transferred back to ANAS)
You've only reported lists for some regions. Is the "list" complete? And is the administrative decision final or are there still changes to be expected?
The decision is final: the dates I reported are those of effective change in management.
Regarding regions, I reported all the changes that were published. I will look into the news to see if I overlooked something.
As for ANAS website, it appears it is not updated yet :pan:
-
As for ANAS website, it appears it is not updated yet :pan:
Is it updated now?
If not, do the pdfs per region indicate the routes which were transferred? https://www.stradeanas.it/it/le-strade/rientro-strade
Sorry if it's BS, I just saw a post on another forum with this link.... ;)
-
As for ANAS website, it appears it is not updated yet :pan:
Is it updated now?
If not, do the pdfs per region indicate the routes which were transferred? https://www.stradeanas.it/it/le-strade/rientro-strade
Sorry if it's BS, I just saw a post on another forum with this link.... ;)
Yes, all regions I posted here are updated: Tuscany, Liguria, Molise, Basilicata, Umbria, Calabria, and also Abruzzo, Campania, Latium.
Marche and Puglia are updated but the new roads do not show in the map, only in the dropdown menu.
-
The last remaining European tier 4 system in Europe (except of Russia which is not Europe IMO). @Si, any plan to pay tribute to battered Italy?
-
The last remaining European tier 4 system in Europe (except of Russia which is not Europe IMO). @Si, any plan to pay tribute to battered Italy?
:D :D
-
I'm getting round to it. Hopefully sometime soon.
-
Just an FYI. I know the system is in preview mode. The western start point for SS675 appears to be incorrect. SS675 starts nearer Monte Romano, branching off from SS1Bis at a rotary that is approx 1.5 miles NE of Monte Romano. GSV confirms this.
-
As for ANAS website, it appears it is not updated yet :pan:
Is it updated now?
If not, do the pdfs per region indicate the routes which were transferred? https://www.stradeanas.it/it/le-strade/rientro-strade
Sorry if it's BS, I just saw a post on another forum with this link.... ;)
Yes, all regions I posted here are updated: Tuscany, Liguria, Molise, Basilicata, Umbria, Calabria, and also Abruzzo, Campania, Latium.
Marche and Puglia are updated but the new roads do not show in the map, only in the dropdown menu.
I contacted ANAS to let them know of the outdated maps.
They answered that they have programmed the maps update - but alas they didn't give me any time frame.
-
Thanks for that.
-
There is an error in Italy "Strade statale":
SS690 is shown as going past Sora arriving at the junction SS509 near Atina.
As a matter of fact SS690 ends at junction "Sora Nord" (SR82_Sora). Everything south of it is called "SSV Sora-A1" and it is not a "SS" despite a similar denomination (it is in fact a provincial road).
And please, can you also correct the label "Strade statale"? It's either "Strada statale" (singular) or "strade statali" (plural).
Thanks
-
More roads have been transferred to ANAS in April 2021. It's almost 3000 km in 4 regions (Emilia-Romagna, Lombardia, Piemonte, Toscana).
Here's the full list, along with those already transferred in 2018 in 11 more regions:
https://www.stradeanas.it/it/le-strade/rientro-strade
-
Is it the last transfer or do they plan another one?
-
Is it the last transfer or do they plan another one?
ANAS website doesn't explicitly say, but there are reasons to believe this will be the last one.
For instance, 15 out of 20 regions (11 + 4) have been addressed. The remaining 5 regions are the so-called "special status" ones (Aosta valley, Sicily, Sardinia, Friuli-Venezia Giulia and Trentino-Alto Adige) which have different rules in their relation with the central State. For instance, the 2001 law that devolved those ANAS roads to the regions did not involve special status regions in the first place.
EDIT: Actually, my previous statement is false.
Roads in Tuscany have been transferred back to ANAS in both occasions, so the regions addressed are 14. Veneto is the only "normal status" one that wasn't addressed.
So apparently regions can be managed in rounds, meaning that there is no way to know if there will be more instances also for regions already addressed.
-
So apparently regions can be managed in rounds, meaning that there is no way to know if there will be more instances also for regions already addressed.
Ok, more to come. Your first report is from May 2018. When can we expect the last one? I think no one knows...
If I got you right, they do it region by region. For the regions we already have a transfer report, we don't expect another one?
If that's right, we might go ahead and address the changes to those regions. We could even activate the system and add the other routes later on when the transfer will be implemented (2022, 2023, 2030,...).
-
As for ANAS website, it appears it is not updated yet :pan:
Is it updated now?
If not, do the pdfs per region indicate the routes which were transferred? https://www.stradeanas.it/it/le-strade/rientro-strade
Sorry if it's BS, I just saw a post on another forum with this link.... ;)
Yes, all regions I posted here are updated: Tuscany, Liguria, Molise, Basilicata, Umbria, Calabria, and also Abruzzo, Campania, Latium.
Marche and Puglia are updated but the new roads do not show in the map, only in the dropdown menu.
I contacted ANAS to let them know of the outdated maps.
They answered that they have programmed the maps update - but alas they didn't give me any time frame.
Are the maps updated now?
-
A system of unnumbered routes? Another tier 4 or tier 5?
They are Strada Statale, just not having SS numbers yet (or detrunked yet if heading the other direction), so they are going in itass just as all the green-hexagon roads are in itaa, even if they aren't Axx.
https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strade_statali_in_Italia
NSA (nuova strada ANAS), strade in attesa di classificazione
Google translated:
NSA (new road ANAS), roads waiting for classification
Sounds similar to future US interstates but there are also "ex" NSA routes. Former SS routes are "future" SS routes now.... ;D
I guess it will be a tier 5 system?
https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuova_strada_ANAS
Are those Nuova strade ANAS routes the routes which have been transfered to ANAS and should be part of itass system now?
Or do those routes still exist in parallel?
Or let's ask this way: What's the potential next logical system below itass?
-
Or let's ask this way: What's the potential next logical system below itass?
From what I remember from the three months I spent in Italy, there's the Strada Statale (~US highways), Strada Regionale (~state highways), and Strada Provinciale (~county highways) (the American equivalents are just me spitballing, not sure if they're accurate). The shields look the same (with SR and SP instead of SS). Now, finding somewhere that lists the Strada Regionale... that doesn't sound fun.
-
So apparently regions can be managed in rounds, meaning that there is no way to know if there will be more instances also for regions already addressed.
Ok, more to come. Your first report is from May 2018. When can we expect the last one? I think no one knows...
Unfortunately, you're correct. It is incredibly hard to extract information from ANAS. Most of the times even data from new openings are vague at best.
If I got you right, they do it region by region. For the regions we already have a transfer report, we don't expect another one?
The most likely answer is "it depends". For instance, I would expect Lombardy to have a second round later on: most of the roads transferred belong to provinces of Pavia, Bergamo, Lecco but very few from Brescia or Sondrio.
I was very suprised that roads like SP BS 236 and 237 weren't mentioned, for instance. Also, it makes little sense that SP469 on the western shore of Lake Iseo was transferred and SP BS 510, on the eastern shore, wasn't, given that the latter is much more important than the former.
If that's right, we might go ahead and address the changes to those regions. We could even activate the system and add the other routes later on when the transfer will be implemented (2022, 2023, 2030,...).
It may make more sense, yes.
-
As for ANAS website, it appears it is not updated yet :pan:
Is it updated now?
If not, do the pdfs per region indicate the routes which were transferred? https://www.stradeanas.it/it/le-strade/rientro-strade
Sorry if it's BS, I just saw a post on another forum with this link.... ;)
Yes, all regions I posted here are updated: Tuscany, Liguria, Molise, Basilicata, Umbria, Calabria, and also Abruzzo, Campania, Latium.
Marche and Puglia are updated but the new roads do not show in the map, only in the dropdown menu.
I contacted ANAS to let them know of the outdated maps.
They answered that they have programmed the maps update - but alas they didn't give me any time frame.
Are the maps updated now?
No, they aren't. It would have been a perfect job for those long smart working days...
-
A system of unnumbered routes? Another tier 4 or tier 5?
They are Strada Statale, just not having SS numbers yet (or detrunked yet if heading the other direction), so they are going in itass just as all the green-hexagon roads are in itaa, even if they aren't Axx.
https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strade_statali_in_Italia
NSA (nuova strada ANAS), strade in attesa di classificazione
Google translated:
NSA (new road ANAS), roads waiting for classification
Sounds similar to future US interstates but there are also "ex" NSA routes. Former SS routes are "future" SS routes now.... ;D
I guess it will be a tier 5 system?
https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuova_strada_ANAS
Are those Nuova strade ANAS routes the routes which have been transfered to ANAS and should be part of itass system now?
Or do those routes still exist in parallel?
NSA are usually new routes, not yet classified as SS, that get this ANAS internal denomination. Once the ministry agrees on a SS code, NSA number is scrapped.
Usually roads which are transferred back to ANAS do not go through this NSA classification.
As a matter of tier, they lie on the same one as SS, though.
Or let's ask this way: What's the potential next logical system below itass?
I think it should be SR (Strada Regionale). Technically, only 8 regions out of 20 contemplate SR, even though some of them actually have none (Piedmont, for instance, contemplate SR roads even though all SR have been transferred to provinces as SP).
-
Or let's ask this way: What's the potential next logical system below itass?
From what I remember from the three months I spent in Italy, there's the Strada Statale (~US highways), Strada Regionale (~state highways), and Strada Provinciale (~county highways) (the American equivalents are just me spitballing, not sure if they're accurate). The shields look the same (with SR and SP instead of SS). Now, finding somewhere that lists the Strada Regionale... that doesn't sound fun.
That is correct.
A bit of backstory about this "transfer-back" operation.
In 2001, the right wing government decided for a so-called "devolution" of some central powers (pushed by northern separatists of Lega). For instance, the National Healthcare System was re-arranged into regional subsystems (now under heavy criticism, given the very different approaches to the pandemic and to the vaccine campaign - but that's another story).
Many SS roads were then devolved to regions, which in turn devolved the vast majority of them to the provinces.
In 2014, however, with the pretext of spending review due to the financial crisis, the left wing government basically set provinces' budget to zero. Nominally they still have competencies (over schools, for instance, and of course provincial roads), but no money to finance manintenance, let alone new construction.
Since then, provincial roads fell into a state of profound decay and many denounced this lack of maintenance. ANAS was forced, then, to take some of these roads under its - much larger - budget in order to plan and finance renovations.
-
Are those Nuova strade ANAS routes the routes which have been transfered to ANAS and should be part of itass system now?
Or do those routes still exist in parallel?
NSA are usually new routes, not yet classified as SS, that get this ANAS internal denomination. Once the ministry agrees on a SS code, NSA number is scrapped.
Usually roads which are transferred back to ANAS do not go through this NSA classification.
As a matter of tier, they lie on the same one as SS, though.
You mean, itass and itanss should both be tier 4 systems?
Nuova SS seem to be like future Interstates and usai (United States Interstate Highways) are tier 1, usaib (United States Business Interstate Highways) are tier 2 and usaif (United States Future Interstate Highways) are tier 3.
That would mean, itass = tier 4 and itanss = tier 5.
Or let's ask this way: What's the potential next logical system below itass?
I think it should be SR (Strada Regionale). Technically, only 8 regions out of 20 contemplate SR, even though some of them actually have none (Piedmont, for instance, contemplate SR roads even though all SR have been transferred to provinces as SP).
If itanss would be tier 5, itasr could also be tier 5. Why not.
Are SR routes unique all over Italy or does every region have it's own SR numbering? If the latter, we might think about splitting Italy into regions like we did for France, Germany, Spain and UK. Italy is the last "big" undivided European country on TM :D
-
If that's right, we might go ahead and address the changes to those regions. We could even activate the system and add the other routes later on when the transfer will be implemented (2022, 2023, 2030,...).
It may make more sense, yes.
yep, better adding the transferred routes and activating itass medium-term and adding newly transferred routes later than waiting ages for anything which might never happen.
-
Are those Nuova strade ANAS routes the routes which have been transfered to ANAS and should be part of itass system now?
Or do those routes still exist in parallel?
NSA are usually new routes, not yet classified as SS, that get this ANAS internal denomination. Once the ministry agrees on a SS code, NSA number is scrapped.
Usually roads which are transferred back to ANAS do not go through this NSA classification.
As a matter of tier, they lie on the same one as SS, though.
You mean, itass and itanss should both be tier 4 systems?
Nuova SS seem to be like future Interstates and usai (United States Interstate Highways) are tier 1, usaib (United States Business Interstate Highways) are tier 2 and usaif (United States Future Interstate Highways) are tier 3.
That would mean, itass = tier 4 and itanss = tier 5.
Never fully understood the concept of "future Interstate". If it is a substandard road designated to become an Interstate, pending upgrade and renovation, then it's not the same thing as SS and NSA. NSA is immediately built up to its standard (which may or may not be superstrada): it just lacks the administrative act that assigns a number to it.
Or let's ask this way: What's the potential next logical system below itass?
I think it should be SR (Strada Regionale). Technically, only 8 regions out of 20 contemplate SR, even though some of them actually have none (Piedmont, for instance, contemplate SR roads even though all SR have been transferred to provinces as SP).
If itanss would be tier 5, itasr could also be tier 5. Why not.
Dunno. In my head, SS and NSA are the same thing, so they belong to the same tier. But that's just me.
Are SR routes unique all over Italy or does every region have it's own SR numbering? If the latter, we might think about splitting Italy into regions like we did for France, Germany, Spain and UK. Italy is the last "big" undivided European country on TM :D
It is indeed the latter. Each region uses its own numbering (as each province does with SP), with different criteria.
-
Or let's ask this way: What's the potential next logical system below itass?
I think it should be SR (Strada Regionale). Technically, only 8 regions out of 20 contemplate SR, even though some of them actually have none (Piedmont, for instance, contemplate SR roads even though all SR have been transferred to provinces as SP).
If itanss would be tier 5, itasr could also be tier 5. Why not.
Dunno. In my head, SS and NSA are the same thing, so they belong to the same tier. But that's just me.
Are SR routes unique all over Italy or does every region have it's own SR numbering? If the latter, we might think about splitting Italy into regions like we did for France, Germany, Spain and UK. Italy is the last "big" undivided European country on TM :D
It is indeed the latter. Each region uses its own numbering (as each province does with SP), with different criteria.
[/quote]
I agree with keeping the SS and NSA in the same tier, since they're essentially the same with minor administrative differences. Additionally, I think that adding the SR (in future) is probably a good idea, but adding the SP might be a bit too complicated.
-
Or let's ask this way: What's the potential next logical system below itass?
I think it should be SR (Strada Regionale). Technically, only 8 regions out of 20 contemplate SR, even though some of them actually have none (Piedmont, for instance, contemplate SR roads even though all SR have been transferred to provinces as SP).
If itanss would be tier 5, itasr could also be tier 5. Why not.
Dunno. In my head, SS and NSA are the same thing, so they belong to the same tier. But that's just me.
I'm also in favor of having SS and NSA in tier 4, and SR tier 5.
However, the maintainer of Italy is (or was) in favor of having NSA as tier 5.
-
However, the maintainer of Italy is (or was) in favor of having NSA as tier 5.
Was I? I concur tier 4.
-
However, the maintainer of Italy is (or was) in favor of having NSA as tier 5.
Was I? I concur tier 4.
No, sorry :D :pan:
You even wrote that there should be one system only:
A system of unnumbered routes? Another tier 4 or tier 5?
They are Strada Statale, just not having SS numbers yet (or detrunked yet if heading the other direction), so they are going in itass just as all the green-hexagon roads are in itaa, even if they aren't Axx.
-
Are SR routes unique all over Italy or does every region have it's own SR numbering? If the latter, we might think about splitting Italy into regions like we did for France, Germany, Spain and UK. Italy is the last "big" undivided European country on TM :D
It is indeed the latter. Each region uses its own numbering (as each province does with SP), with different criteria.
@Si404, what do you generally think about a split into regions for future SR systems?
If we would agree on splitting, would we do it before or after the rework and/or activation of itass? I mean, we could also activate itass by regions.... smaller iterations, starting with regions where the transfer back to ANAS already happened etc.
-
@Si404, what do you generally think about a split into regions for future SR systems?
If we would agree on splitting, would we do it before or after the rework and/or activation of itass? I mean, we could also activate itass by regions.... smaller iterations, starting with regions where the transfer back to ANAS already happened etc.
If there's going to do a split, the rework and review of itass is the time to do it.
-
After speaking with michih, I decided to do the rework (check the existing routes and add the new ones). Just that it will take some time, as I had in the last time little time for TM and the situation doesn't seem to dramatically improve in the next months. But I hope I can do it in a time horizon of about 1 year.
-
After speaking with michih, I decided to do the rework (check the existing routes and add the new ones). Just that it will take some time, as I had in the last time little time for TM and the situation doesn't seem to dramatically improve in the next months. But I hope I can do it in a time horizon of about 1 year.
Thanks! I think that the rework includes a detailed review - four yearss after creation of the system - and another peer-review is not required.
I changed the European tier 4 overview (https://forum.travelmapping.net/index.php?topic=131.msg619#msg619):
itass - Italy Strada Statale (si404) reviewer: michih (many routes were transferred back to ANAS; system must be reworked)
-->
itass - Italy Strada Statale (panda80) reviewer: rework = review (many routes were transferred back to ANAS; system is being reworked)
Fine to all?
-
Thank you all for your work.
@panda80, don't hesitate to contact me for anything, if I can help.
-
Started with the introduction of new routes, yesterday was Abruzzo, today Basilicata (will come with the next update).
-
Started with the introduction of new routes, yesterday was Abruzzo, today Basilicata (will come with the next update).
8)
Great! Looking forward to it.
-
System will be temporarily removed due to some data errors (https://github.com/TravelMapping/HighwayData/pull/4789#issuecomment-845272835) with the latest rework.
I think that new routes of the following regions have been added so far:
- Abruzzo
- Basilicata
- Lazio
- Umbria
- Toscana
-
Puglia was also added today, should be in with the next site update.
-
As for ANAS website, it appears it is not updated yet :pan:
Is it updated now?
If not, do the pdfs per region indicate the routes which were transferred? https://www.stradeanas.it/it/le-strade/rientro-strade
Sorry if it's BS, I just saw a post on another forum with this link.... ;)
Yes, all regions I posted here are updated: Tuscany, Liguria, Molise, Basilicata, Umbria, Calabria, and also Abruzzo, Campania, Latium.
Marche and Puglia are updated but the new roads do not show in the map, only in the dropdown menu.
I contacted ANAS to let them know of the outdated maps.
They answered that they have programmed the maps update - but alas they didn't give me any time frame.
I would like to report that ANAS has finally updated the maps in their website.
I didn't thoroughly check all the roads but it seems they're mostly there.
EDIT:
It seems that *almost* all the regions had their maps updated, with the notable exception of Lombardy...
-
Updates to Campania and Marche should be live with the next site update.
https://github.com/TravelMapping/HighwayData/pull/5028
https://github.com/TravelMapping/HighwayData/pull/5029
-
Updates to Campania and Marche should be live with the next site update.
https://github.com/TravelMapping/HighwayData/pull/5028
https://github.com/TravelMapping/HighwayData/pull/5029
Thanks!
Seems that not all the new roads are there, though. For instance, in Marche SS360 is missing, as well as SS485, SS502 and some others.
-
@Si404, what do you generally think about a split into regions for future SR systems?
If we would agree on splitting, would we do it before or after the rework and/or activation of itass? I mean, we could also activate itass by regions.... smaller iterations, starting with regions where the transfer back to ANAS already happened etc.
If there's going to do a split, the rework and review of itass is the time to do it.
Bump on this - do we want to split?
I've drafted split routes for the other systems, and am happy to do itass if we decide to split.
-
@Si404, what do you generally think about a split into regions for future SR systems?
If we would agree on splitting, would we do it before or after the rework and/or activation of itass? I mean, we could also activate itass by regions.... smaller iterations, starting with regions where the transfer back to ANAS already happened etc.
If there's going to do a split, the rework and review of itass is the time to do it.
Bump on this - do we want to split?
I'd love to see Italy split into regions. It is the last of the "big five" (Western) European countries which is not yet split on TM.
Please agree with @panda80 what's the best way (and time) to split because you'd work on the same files. I think it would be wise to wait till @panda80 will have dealt with all regions. But who knows what @panda80 thinks about it...
We should use https://tmstage.teresco.org/ for testing the split version, and keep in mind that there was some trouble when splitting DEU, ESP and FRA. The "new" 6-field user .list file entry (https://forum.travelmapping.net/index.php?topic=3694) should help. Maybe @yakra can help again with converting the user .list files (https://forum.travelmapping.net/index.php?topic=3278)?
-
First of all, what's the reason behind splitting Italy? For me the only reasonable one would be to be possible to activate region by region, but as the preview kms are also visible in the stats I don't see it to be a very important issue. As the plan to introduce SPs routes is a far-future one, I think we better wait with the splitting. Splitting has a big downside, it takes much longer to introduce the routes after a trip in the .list files, making TM user-unfriendly. In my opinion we should split just where it is absolutely necessary (like FRA, DEU for example, where someone already had the intention to introduce 5th tier systems in the near future when the splitting was done).
-
I have no reason to support or oppose splitting Italy, but did want to address one of panda80's concerns about entering travels across subdivisions. Hopefully by viewing a route that crosses subdivision boundaries as a connected route, using the 6-field list entries that can span subdivisions makes it just as easy as if no subdivisions were there.
-
what's the reason behind splitting Italy?
- The possibility to draft the tier 5 systems (sure, this will likely only happen in the remote future)
- The possibility to track travels region by region
- The possibility to compare region stats
- The possibility to see that you've clinched a region (or that you are close to....)
Splitting has a big downside, it takes much longer to introduce the routes after a trip in the .list files, making TM user-unfriendly.
As Jim wrote, the 6-field list entries (https://travelmapping.net/participate.php#multiregion) can help. However, my list file structure is region by region and I don't use the option.
In my opinion we should split just where it is absolutely necessary (like FRA, DEU for example, where someone already had the intention to introduce 5th tier systems in the near future when the splitting was done).
3 out of 4 reason I mentioned above are still valid.
Since we get more and more travelers, and each traveler gets more and more travels, the conversion effort for the users will be least the earlier we will split.
Just my 2ct. I don't say that we have to split.
Note: si404 has already split the routes (wpt files). The next steps would (likely) "only" be testing the data set, and converting the user list files.
-
We should use https://tmstage.teresco.org/ for testing the split version, and keep in mind that there was some trouble when splitting DEU, ESP and FRA. The "new" 6-field user .list file entry (https://forum.travelmapping.net/index.php?topic=3694) should help. Maybe @yakra can help again with converting the user .list files (https://forum.travelmapping.net/index.php?topic=3278)?
@yakra: Would you volunteer and make some magic if we really decide for splitting?
-
One bonus of splitting is that its easier to compare with ANAS data, which is done by region, and check that its all been brought up to date.
I'm easy either way.
-
- The possibility to draft the tier 5 systems (sure, this will likely only happen in the remote future)
- The possibility to track travels region by region
- The possibility to compare region stats
- The possibility to see that you've clinched a region (or that you are close to....)
You have the stats for a region, but than it's more difficult to see the stats for a country. Maybe for hardcore users, that like to invest a lot of time in TM and don't care about having to write much more lines after a trip (like us), it's ok, but for normal Joe travellers it's much more difficult. Noticed it as I introduced the A9 in Germany in my daughter list, after we drove from Munich to Berlin. Before the splitting of Germany you would have written 1 line, now you have to write about 20 lines, having to invest about 20-30 minutes in introducing this one motorway to your list file. I think Chriszwolle mentioned this aspect as he send his feedback about TM. I think he didn't updated his list afterwards.
-
With the 6-field .list entries, A9 for emmaf would only need a single line:
DEU-BB A9 1 DEU-BY A9 76
-
You can use the .list tool to make entries from this (https://travelmapping.net/hb/showroute.php?units=miles&u=si404&r=deubb.a009&cr) (got by simply clicking 'View Connected Route' on any chopped section). Doesn't take very long at all to add entries across multiple regions.
A lack of country stats are a issue though.
-
Country stats are certainly doable, just need to get it done.
-
You can use the .list tool to make entries from this (https://travelmapping.net/hb/showroute.php?units=miles&u=si404&r=deubb.a009&cr) (got by simply clicking 'View Connected Route' on any chopped section). Doesn't take very long at all to add entries across multiple regions.
I understand how you mean it (see Jim's post) but I still have to say: NO, you can't! You don't get the entries (by regions) but one entry only. Not good for users who sort their list file by regions. However, I think it would be doable. Likely no big deal. E.g. just another check box in the list tool to switch from 6- to 4-field-entries in showroute.php for connected routes.
Country stats are certainly doable, just need to get it done.
yep.
-
With the 6-field .list entries, A9 for emmaf would only need a single line:
DEU-BB A9 1 DEU-BY A9 76
Very good improvement, removes much of my thoughts about splitting. I am ok with whatever you will decide.
-
With the 6-field .list entries, A9 for emmaf would only need a single line:
DEU-BB A9 1 DEU-BY A9 76
Very good improvement, removes much of my thoughts about splitting. I am ok with whatever you will decide.
:)
We should use https://tmstage.teresco.org/ for testing the split version
@si404 Is everything ready for a test on tmstage?
Maybe @yakra can help again with converting the user .list files (https://forum.travelmapping.net/index.php?topic=3278)?
@yakra: Would you volunteer and make some magic if we really decide for splitting?
@yakra?
-
We should use https://tmstage.teresco.org/ for testing the split version
@si404 Is everything ready for a test on tmstage?
Yep, I believe it is.
-
Sorry I'm late to the party, guys.
So the Italy split needs to happen, and we're moving forward with it then? Looks like we're all prepared for it in any case...
I've uncommented the split systems and am loading them up on lab2 in order to take a look at eure2 in mapview.
I see that they are formatted systemName+'2' -- splitregion support was modeled after how FRA was done, and expects systemName+'r'. One of three things will need to happen:
1. Change these systems to systemName+'r' codes. <--It doesn't make sense to ask you to do this.
2. Change the splitregion routine to use '2' instead.
3. Change the splitregion routine to append a custom character string specified on the command line. <--This is the best option, though a wee bit more involved.
Edit: Changes made. I think. Haven't attempted compiling yet.
Edit 2: siteupdate reports a couple errors in the highway data, then crashes. I'm going to stash my changes and try option 2, just to be sure the problem wasn't introduced just now. I expect the results to be the same. This shouldn't be a showstopper though -- the crash occurs during .list rewrites, after we get the log files we need to make sure all the concurrencies check out.
Edit 3: No, wait! I'm pretty sure I didn't uncomment the split systems here on BiggaTomato. Lemme try that out.
-
HD @ 78b2123c537430631e48d034b8cc01f519bf4ab4
UD @ 5c1816a7e606ffe83b2bf4812d5a654168cf56b1
The log files are pretty big and unmanageable.
ITA-TOS E80 still contains data from:
• ITA-LAZ E80
• ITA-ABR E80Car
• ITA-LAZ E80Bor
ITA-LOM A7, ITA-PIE A7, & ITA-LIG A7 are all identical. Same as the original ITA file except for the visible border points.
On the plus side, eursf & eursf2 are clean.
Once these issues are fixed I can give it another go and see what's left over.
If there's any info left in the logs after the next pass, boil it down with:
for s in {eure,itaa,itass}{,2}; do echo $s; grep -h "has [^0] concurrent segments with same name+banner in different region(s) (1 expected)" $s-concurrencies.log | sed 's~ has [0-9]\+ concurrent segments.*~~' | tr ' ' ';' > $s.csv; doneand then the same thing with just 0
-
A little more info...
eure:
ITA E62 +X826 +TOS/LOM has 0 concurrent segments with same name+banner in different region(s) (1 expected)
ITA E62 SS33 +X821 has 0 concurrent segments with same name+banner in different region(s) (1 expected)
itass2:
ITA-LAZ SS1Mon SP140 LAZ/TOS has 0 concurrent segments with same name+banner in different region(s) (1 expected)
ITA-MAR SS77Dir SS361 SS78 has 0 concurrent segments with same name+banner in different region(s) (1 expected)
itass:
ITA SS77Dir SS361 SS78 has 0 concurrent segments with same name+banner in different region(s) (1 expected)
SS77Dir suggests a banner/abbrev mixup:
itass2.csv:itass2;ITA-MAR;SS77;Dir;;;itamar.ss077dir;
itass.csv:itass;ITA;SS77;;Dir;;ita.ss077dir;
ita.ss077dir;;;;ABBREV_AS_CON_BANNER;itass_con.csv#L189
ita.ss106tar;;;;ABBREV_AS_CON_BANNER;itass_con.csv#L228
ita.ss212ben;;;;ABBREV_AS_CON_BANNER;itass_con.csv#L337
There are 2 different underlying causes, so I've opened a pull request to clarify the manual (https://github.com/TravelMapping/Web/pull/697/files).
-
Looking at Mapview of the regions to see what leaks out of the regions so I can do a first round of fixes at some point
- ITA-ABR - fine
- ITA-BAS - fine
- ITA-CAL - fine
- ITA-CAM - SS749 and SS17SMC in wrong region, E842 needs splitting
- ITA-EMI - A21, E70, E31, A22, E45
- ITA-FRI - A28
- ITA-LAZ - SS5
- ITA-LIG - A6, A12, E31, SS62 not split
- ITA-LOM - A7, A21 not split, A8/A26 missing, A22 missing
- ITA-MAR - SS685 segments need swapping
- ITA-MOL - SS158
- ITA-PIE - A6, A7, A21, A8/A26, E62 all leak out
- ITA-PUG - E842, SS655 need splitting
- ITA-SAR - an island, all fine
- ITA-SIC - an island, all fine
- ITA-TOS - E80, A12, SS62, E31 need splitting. SS64 has two sections that should be in Emilia
- ITA-TRE - fine
- ITA-UMB - SS685 segments need swapping
- ITA-VAL - all fine
- ITA-VEN - SS52
-
The log files are pretty big and unmanageable.
<snip?
Once these issues are fixed I can give it another go and see what's left over.
I've gone through and hopefully dealt with all the stuff leaking out of their rightful regions.
One issue I found that would give an awful lot of errors is that I didn't add the split points into itass. That won't take long as I have files to do that.
Now to get it all uploaded without Github crashing on me. :pan:
Edit: https://github.com/TravelMapping/HighwayData/pull/5309
-
New national road numbers in Lombardy Region (former provincial roads): https://www.skyscrapercity.com/threads/484944/post-176112156
-
Unrelated to the split -- looks like there's nothing wrong with this; it's just uniquely weird:
https://travelmapping.net/hb/showroute.php?r=ita.ss027var&lat=45.771953&lon=7.305458&zoom=17
This route looks like it's unbannered SS27 (Variney), as opposed to a Variante without an Abbrev.
That makes it SS27Var, which ends at... SS27Var. A Variante. This is a normal waypoint label, as it's standard to leave off Abbrevs from labels unless needed to disambiguate.
Unbannered SS27 picks up again on the other side. Is this similar to how A1 will become A1(M) for a while, or IRL M6 becomes N6?
(What's the difference between Var and not? Anything related to this SS 27 (https://www.google.com/maps/@45.7719714,7.3057405,3a,15y,291.9h,90.64t/data=!3m10!1e1!3m8!1sGgPk8_wEvIA8LsgPlvjXzw!2e0!5s20111001T000000!7i13312!8i6656!9m2!1b1!2i40) -> SR 27 (https://www.google.com/maps/@45.7719735,7.305753,3a,15.7y,288.4h,90.68t/data=!3m10!1e1!3m8!1sVHGckXd8fzFxOUZeHVDj_w!2e0!5s20190701T000000!7i16384!8i8192!9m2!1b1!2i40) signage change?)
South of there:
ITA SS27Var ends at T2, but there's no corresponding route in the HB though it's (https://www.google.com/maps/@45.7421394,7.3852724,3a,15y,270.95h,94.33t/data=!3m10!1e1!3m8!1sv7JIl0Uln2b0fXrcYkFuCw!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3Dv7JIl0Uln2b0fXrcYkFuCw%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D39.467426%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192!9m2!1b1!2i40) signed (https://www.google.com/maps/@45.7417393,7.3835694,3a,31.5y,319.2h,107.26t/data=!3m9!1e1!3m7!1s_22q1B5zysphpnk-47C1NQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192!9m2!1b1!2i40) down (https://www.google.com/maps/@45.741237,7.3838665,3a,15y,356.17h,92.57t/data=!3m9!1e1!3m7!1sdQ-Zx5FWNOIP9Tr5iKqdEA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192!9m2!1b1!2i40) south (https://www.google.com/maps/@45.738104,7.3853197,3a,27.6y,16.19h,98.09t/data=!3m10!1e1!3m8!1sP--lhMh_fZjDfvQ-0PkWqQ!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3DP--lhMh_fZjDfvQ-0PkWqQ%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D278.42438%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192!9m2!1b1!2i40).
E27 is missing a point here (http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=45.750894&lon=7.319373) or here (http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=45.750814&lon=7.318474) or wherever you decide the correct coords are.
-
(What's the difference between Var and not? Anything related to this SS 27 (https://www.google.com/maps/@45.7719714,7.3057405,3a,15y,291.9h,90.64t/data=!3m10!1e1!3m8!1sGgPk8_wEvIA8LsgPlvjXzw!2e0!5s20111001T000000!7i13312!8i6656!9m2!1b1!2i40) -> SR 27 (https://www.google.com/maps/@45.7719735,7.305753,3a,15.7y,288.4h,90.68t/data=!3m10!1e1!3m8!1sVHGckXd8fzFxOUZeHVDj_w!2e0!5s20190701T000000!7i16384!8i8192!9m2!1b1!2i40) signage change?)
My only authority on this is when I lived in Italy for a couple months back in 2019, but the SS -> SR change signifies a change from a national highway to a regional highway (i.e. who maintains it... I think. In the given case SS27 would be maintained by ANAS while SR27 would be maintained by whoever in Aosta is in charge of that).
The "Var" suffix I don't really understand at all; I went on a run one day from Firenze to Ellera to clinch SS67VarFal (https://travelmapping.net/hb/showroute.php?units=miles&u=the_spui_ninja&r=ita.ss067varfal) (yes I've clinched highways by running) and SS67 just turns into SS67Var (see here (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.7840982,11.3684521,3a,15y,74.04h,91.09t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1ssq3EOLn-FF_acWMlbsFL3A!2e0!7i16384!8i8192)) then turns back again on the other side of Ellera. My only thought is that the main road in Ellera used to be part of SS67, then they built SS67Var and decommissioned the bit of SS67 in Ellera without any renumbering. It looks like the same thing with SS27, since there's a road through Cré that looks like it used to be SS27.
-
My only thought is that the main road in Ellera used to be part of SS67, then they built SS67Var and decommissioned the bit of SS67 in Ellera without any renumbering. It looks like the same thing with SS27, since there's a road through Cré that looks like it used to be SS27.
That's exactly what it is. It's building a bannered bypass, amd keeping the bannered route bannered rather than making it vanilla when the bypassed vanilla road is renumbered (normally not long after the bypass opens - basically as soon as they transfer maintenance).
It seems to be a get around for kilometre posts changes when a new alignment happens is to treat the new alignment as a different road and so the mileage markers don't change on the vanilla route.
-
And here's our km post. (https://www.google.com/maps/@45.77198,7.3054835,3a,15.3y,285.86h,92.37t/data=!3m10!1e1!3m8!1sViFiiRRoX1B1-ByOzi-k8w!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3DViFiiRRoX1B1-ByOzi-k8w%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D299.78775%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192!9m2!1b1!2i40) (Somehow I missed the Variante on the sign earlier.) OK, got it!
-
Unrelated to the split -- looks like there's nothing wrong with this; it's just uniquely weird:
https://travelmapping.net/hb/showroute.php?r=ita.ss027var&lat=45.771953&lon=7.305458&zoom=17
This route looks like it's unbannered SS27 (Variney), as opposed to a Variante without an Abbrev.
That makes it SS27Var, which ends at... SS27Var. A Variante. This is a normal waypoint label, as it's standard to leave off Abbrevs from labels unless needed to disambiguate.
Unbannered SS27 picks up again on the other side. Is this similar to how A1 will become A1(M) for a while, or IRL M6 becomes N6?
(What's the difference between Var and not? Anything related to this SS 27 (https://www.google.com/maps/@45.7719714,7.3057405,3a,15y,291.9h,90.64t/data=!3m10!1e1!3m8!1sGgPk8_wEvIA8LsgPlvjXzw!2e0!5s20111001T000000!7i13312!8i6656!9m2!1b1!2i40) -> SR 27 (https://www.google.com/maps/@45.7719735,7.305753,3a,15.7y,288.4h,90.68t/data=!3m10!1e1!3m8!1sVHGckXd8fzFxOUZeHVDj_w!2e0!5s20190701T000000!7i16384!8i8192!9m2!1b1!2i40) signage change?)
South of there:
ITA SS27Var ends at T2, but there's no corresponding route in the HB though it's (https://www.google.com/maps/@45.7421394,7.3852724,3a,15y,270.95h,94.33t/data=!3m10!1e1!3m8!1sv7JIl0Uln2b0fXrcYkFuCw!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3Dv7JIl0Uln2b0fXrcYkFuCw%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D39.467426%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192!9m2!1b1!2i40) signed (https://www.google.com/maps/@45.7417393,7.3835694,3a,31.5y,319.2h,107.26t/data=!3m9!1e1!3m7!1s_22q1B5zysphpnk-47C1NQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192!9m2!1b1!2i40) down (https://www.google.com/maps/@45.741237,7.3838665,3a,15y,356.17h,92.57t/data=!3m9!1e1!3m7!1sdQ-Zx5FWNOIP9Tr5iKqdEA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192!9m2!1b1!2i40) south (https://www.google.com/maps/@45.738104,7.3853197,3a,27.6y,16.19h,98.09t/data=!3m10!1e1!3m8!1sP--lhMh_fZjDfvQ-0PkWqQ!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3DP--lhMh_fZjDfvQ-0PkWqQ%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D278.42438%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192!9m2!1b1!2i40).
E27 is missing a point here (http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=45.750894&lon=7.319373) or here (http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=45.750814&lon=7.318474) or wherever you decide the correct coords are.
A Variante is an upgrade of a road on a different alignment. The "variante" suffix pops up when owners of the original road and the variante are the same entity, typically the State through ANAS.
It goes like this. Road SSxx need to be upgraded on a different alignment; ANAS builds it and the new one becomes SSxxVar. Then several scenarios open:
- it stays like this;
- the original road is transferred to provinces, which may or may not rename it. The SS is always lost, but it can get SP, SR, SPexSS SP_provincecode...
- if the original road is transferred, the variante may or may not get renamed to the original road name. That happened for instance with SS76: the original road was called SS76, when the superstrada was built in the 70s it was transferred to the province and called SP76, while the superstrada got the original SS76 name.
Regarding the example of SS27, it seems that in the website database SS27var is wrong. According to ANAS website, SS27var basically ends at the town of Gignod and ends at the current SS27Var waypoint, while the rest belongs to SS27:
SS27:
(https://i.imgur.com/k4CJyNp.png)
SS27var:
(https://i.imgur.com/WJHNmxB.png)
-
I think the DB actually has it right.
What's confusing is that for ITA SS27Var, Var is a city abbreviation (for Variney) rather than a banner:
itass;ITA;SS27;;Var;Variney;ita.ss027var;
itass;ITA;SS27;Var;Gig;Gignod;ita.ss027vargig;
Notice the 2 vs 1 semicolons before the Var.
| System | Region | Route | Banner | Abbrev | City | Root | AltRouteNames |
| itass | ITA | SS27 | | Var | Variney | ita.ss027var |
| itass | ITA | SS27 | Var | Gig | Gignod | ita.ss027vargig |
-
Ah, I see, I didn't realize that.
-
As for ANAS website, it appears it is not updated yet :pan:
Is it updated now?
If not, do the pdfs per region indicate the routes which were transferred? https://www.stradeanas.it/it/le-strade/rientro-strade
Sorry if it's BS, I just saw a post on another forum with this link.... ;)
Yes, all regions I posted here are updated: Tuscany, Liguria, Molise, Basilicata, Umbria, Calabria, and also Abruzzo, Campania, Latium.
Marche and Puglia are updated but the new roads do not show in the map, only in the dropdown menu.
I contacted ANAS to let them know of the outdated maps.
They answered that they have programmed the maps update - but alas they didn't give me any time frame.
I would like to report that ANAS has finally updated the maps in their website.
I didn't thoroughly check all the roads but it seems they're mostly there.
EDIT:
It seems that *almost* all the regions had their maps updated, with the notable exception of Lombardy...
Lombardy has been updated as well on ANAS Website.
-
I'd like to signal this new State road in Marche:
SS256var from Fabriano to Matelica.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/directions?engine=fossgis_osrm_car&route=43.3442%2C12.9558%3B43.2775%2C12.9876#map=13/43.3074/13.0095
By the way, are you going to add the roads that were transferred back to ANAS from the regions? No pressure, just to have an idea of the timeline
-
By the way, are you going to add the roads that were transferred back to ANAS from the regions?
After speaking with michih, I decided to do the rework (check the existing routes and add the new ones). Just that it will take some time, as I had in the last time little time for TM and the situation doesn't seem to dramatically improve in the next months. But I hope I can do it in a time horizon of about 1 year.
I think 8 out of 20 regions are done now. Not much "off the initial estimation". @panda80 told me back in September that he will be quite busy with life in the next months..... Expect delays....
@si404 dealt with the region split meanwhile. Not sure what's the next step on this. Are you waiting for anything - or just lack of time?
-
@si404 dealt with the region split meanwhile. Not sure what's the next step on this. Are you waiting for anything - or just lack of time?
I'm rather busy currently, but there's not a huge amount I can do on the region split other than fix errors I already know about. And I believe I did all the route segments aren't right errors.
-
By the way, are you going to add the roads that were transferred back to ANAS from the regions?
After speaking with michih, I decided to do the rework (check the existing routes and add the new ones). Just that it will take some time, as I had in the last time little time for TM and the situation doesn't seem to dramatically improve in the next months. But I hope I can do it in a time horizon of about 1 year.
I think 8 out of 20 regions are done now. Not much "off the initial estimation". @panda80 told me back in September that he will be quite busy with life in the next months..... Expect delays....
@si404 dealt with the region split meanwhile. Not sure what's the next step on this. Are you waiting for anything - or just lack of time?
Thanks. No rush, really.
-
We currently think about a seamless way for splitting a region into multiple regions behind the scenes. It seems that we might have a solution without forcing users to update their list files. However, it will still take time to implement it. Just stay tuned :)
@Si404, what do you generally think about a split into regions for future SR systems?
If we would agree on splitting, would we do it before or after the rework and/or activation of itass? I mean, we could also activate itass by regions.... smaller iterations, starting with regions where the transfer back to ANAS already happened etc.
If there's going to do a split, the rework and review of itass is the time to do it.
Bump on this - do we want to split?
I've drafted split routes for the other systems, and am happy to do itass if we decide to split.
-
I am quite in delay with the introduction of the new routes, because I had much less time in the last months for TM. I was also stuck because in some provinces there are also SP's on the lists, should we introduce them too? They will be maintained by ANAS but will remain with an SP number from what I understand.
-
I am quite in delay with the introduction of the new routes, because I had much less time in the last months for TM. I was also stuck because in some provinces there are also SP's on the lists, should we introduce them too? They will be maintained by ANAS but will remain with an SP number from what I understand.
Not sure. I could check on a case-by-case basis.
-
itass2_con.csv has multiple routes without names (https://github.com/TravelMapping/DataProcessing/issues/338) that should be differentiated:
itass2;SS12;Var;;itatos.ss012var
itass2;SS12;Var;;itaemi.ss012var
itass2;SS12;Var;;itaven.ss012var
itass2;SS12;Var;;itatos.ss012var
itass2;SS12;Var;;itaemi.ss012var
itass2;SS12;Var;;itaven.ss012var
itass2;SS16;Dir;;itaabr.ss016dir
itass2;SS16;Dir;;itamar.ss016dir
itass2;SS7;Racc;;italaz.ss007racc
itass2;SS7;Racc;;itacam.ss007racc
itass2;SS7;Racc;;itabas.ss007racc
itass2;SS7;Racc;;itapug.ss007racc
itass2;SS7;Racc;;italaz.ss007racc
itass2;SS7;Racc;;itacam.ss007racc
itass2;SS7;Racc;;itabas.ss007racc
itass2;SS7;Racc;;itapug.ss007racc
itass2;SS7;Racc;;italaz.ss007racc
itass2;SS7;Racc;;itacam.ss007racc
itass2;SS7;Racc;;itabas.ss007racc
itass2;SS7;Racc;;itapug.ss007racc
-
Dropping this here because it seems this is the de facto Italy Split topic.
Making a separate post for this in case it's appropriate to split this one and merge elsewhere.
(Previous post (https://forum.travelmapping.net/index.php?topic=2095.msg26967#msg26967), in case that does happen)
There are a couple similar examples in itaa2_con.csv, though these look like separate ConnectedRoutes that should be merged, a la KY/IN I-265FutLou:
itaa2;RA5;;Raccordo Autostradale Scalo Sicignano - Potenza;itacam.ra005
itaa2;RA5;;Raccordo Autostradale Scalo Sicignano - Potenza;itabas.ra005
itaa2;RA6;;Raccordo Autostradale Bettolle-Perugia;itatos.ra006
itaa2;RA6;;Raccordo Autostradale Bettolle-Perugia;itaumb.ra006
-
And one more for eure2_con.csv:
eure2;E45;;;itatre.e45,itaven.e45,italom.e45,itaemi.e45,itatos.e45,itaumb.e45,italaz.e45ort,itaumb.e45ort,italaz.e45bau,itaumb.e45cas,italaz.e45,itacam.e45,itabas.e45,itacal.e45
eure2;E45;;;itasic.e45
eure2;E74;;;italig.e74
eure2;E74;;;itapie.e74
-
Is it the last transfer or do they plan another one?
ANAS website doesn't explicitly say, but there are reasons to believe this will be the last one.
For instance, 15 out of 20 regions (11 + 4) have been addressed. The remaining 5 regions are the so-called "special status" ones (Aosta valley, Sicily, Sardinia, Friuli-Venezia Giulia and Trentino-Alto Adige) which have different rules in their relation with the central State. For instance, the 2001 law that devolved those ANAS roads to the regions did not involve special status regions in the first place.
EDIT: Actually, my previous statement is false.
Roads in Tuscany have been transferred back to ANAS in both occasions, so the regions addressed are 14. Veneto is the only "normal status" one that wasn't addressed.
So apparently regions can be managed in rounds, meaning that there is no way to know if there will be more instances also for regions already addressed.
Just out of curiosity, is Friuli-Venezia Giulia (or any other "special status region") addressed now?
-
Is it the last transfer or do they plan another one?
ANAS website doesn't explicitly say, but there are reasons to believe this will be the last one.
For instance, 15 out of 20 regions (11 + 4) have been addressed. The remaining 5 regions are the so-called "special status" ones (Aosta valley, Sicily, Sardinia, Friuli-Venezia Giulia and Trentino-Alto Adige) which have different rules in their relation with the central State. For instance, the 2001 law that devolved those ANAS roads to the regions did not involve special status regions in the first place.
EDIT: Actually, my previous statement is false.
Roads in Tuscany have been transferred back to ANAS in both occasions, so the regions addressed are 14. Veneto is the only "normal status" one that wasn't addressed.
So apparently regions can be managed in rounds, meaning that there is no way to know if there will be more instances also for regions already addressed.
Just out of curiosity, is Friuli-Venezia Giulia (or any other "special status region") addressed now?
Nope.
Maybe the status of these special regions road won't be changed at all.
-
Thanks.
-
In 2022 4 new national roads have been issued in Piedmont region: https://www.skyscrapercity.com/threads/484944/post-180995331
-
@panda80: https://travelmapping.net/devel/datacheck.php?rg=ITA&show=LONG_UNDERSCORE
The wps are (currently) not in use can could safely be changed from 4-letter to 3-letter.
https://travelmapping.net/devel/manual/wayptlabels.php#over2
Choose 3-letter suffixes for nearby towns
-
This seems to run from SS720 at ViaBeg (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.8408336,7.8441017,3a,15y,263.08h,87.09t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sRF9wWLkVkddphQ6Ngar0wg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu) west to SS718 at ViaLam (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.83051,7.7963355,3a,15.7y,315.97h,90.98t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sSOIuQ38vR2HqXEZmwmPtsw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu).
-
System in preview. Please merge: https://forum.travelmapping.net/index.php?topic=2095
-
The name of the system should be Italy Strade Statali (plural), not Italy Strada Statale (singular)
-
The name of the system should be Italy Strade Statali (plural), not Italy Strada Statale (singular)
It is in the database already - just not in this forum thread. Editing first message...
-
Few things which I mentioned elsewhere (https://forum.travelmapping.net/index.php?topic=6237) but for tidiness will throw here as well:
I'd combine SS1Liv with SS1 as an implied concurrency.
SS1Liv: needs a point at the A12Liv ramps
SS258: missing route, need to add.
SS714DirFra: could use a point at Contrada Ceretto (I got off A14 but then turned off here)
The tier 4 master thread mentions this system is being reworked on account of a lot of route maintenance transfer occurring, what is the status of that? Is a more systematic peer review plausible to undertake yet?
-
Sardinia
SS131Dir (Olbia) misses a wp for a GSJ (https://travelmapping.net/hb/showroute.php?r=ita.ss131dirolb&lat=40.910333&lon=9.472318&zoom=16).
SS729 and concurrent E840 miss a wp for a GSJ (https://travelmapping.net/hb/showroute.php?r=ita.ss729olb&lat=40.898757&lon=9.491565&zoom=16). btw, 'ViaVen' just east of it is slightly off
SS389Dir (Udduso)'s east end is at the wrong junction (https://travelmapping.net/hb/showroute.php?r=ita.ss389dirudd&lat=40.581171&lon=9.255091&zoom=16).
SS195Racc (Casteddu)'s concurrency with E25 (Cagliari (https://travelmapping.net/hb/showroute.php?u=michih&r=ita.ss195racccas&lat=39.251730&lon=9.078430&zoom=16) is broken.
SS195 (https://travelmapping.net/hb/showroute.php?r=ita.ss195) misses three wps at junctions leading to the parallel expressway: +X657061 should be a visible wp, another wp is required in Santu Perdu (north of ViaEur), and finally a wp is required south of ViaEur.
-
The tier 4 master thread mentions this system is being reworked on account of a lot of route maintenance transfer occurring, what is the status of that?
If memory serves, it's incomplete since not all regions have published their data. We don't expect that coming anytime soon. Maybe never.
Is a more systematic peer review plausible to undertake yet?
I think it could make sense to peer review the system by regions once the split into regions will be live. Minimum for those regions with adequate data.
-
Sicily
SS640 (https://travelmapping.net/hb/showroute.php?r=ita.ss640&lat=37.465598&lon=14.007955&zoom=15) should be moved onto new alignment west of Caltanissetta.
SS189 (https://travelmapping.net/hb/showroute.php?r=ita.ss189&lat=37.318959&lon=13.587604&zoom=17) south of SS118/SS122 is not indicated on OSM nor GM nor GSV. Truncate?
-
Thanks @si404 for fixing (https://github.com/TravelMapping/HighwayData/pull/7643) the Sardinia and Sicily issues mentioned upthread. However, there are some (new) issues:
https://github.com/TravelMapping/HighwayData/pull/7643#issuecomment-2302629613
- S389DirUdd and SS389 wps need to be synced (in ITA directory, didn't check ITA-SAR)
- E25Cag + SS554 concurrency broken
- Please check SS729's west end. It's on concurrency with SS597 now but OSM, GM and April 2024 GSV indicate it on the direct route to SS131 which is not covered by any SS road now.
I didn't check all changes though.
https://github.com/TravelMapping/HighwayData/pull/7643#issuecomment-2302681775
Well, I still had mapview opened.... There is a concurrency issue at https://travelmapping.net/hb/showroute.php?r=ita.ss389&lat=40.797811&lon=9.280851&zoom=15 SS389 meets SS597 but there are also SS729 and E840. Not sure if SS597 should exist at all here.
Same with SS597Chi just further west.
-
More for Sicily:
- SS640 (https://travelmapping.net/hb/showroute.php?r=ita.ss640)'s east end wp coords needs to be synced with A19Cal (https://travelmapping.net/hb/showroute.php?r=ita.a019cal&lat=37.536317&lon=14.129673&zoom=16) and SS626.
- The short A19 segment... well, there was a green motorway sign back in 2012 (https://maps.app.goo.gl/LAuvBRuW7eXADYiJ8). However, I don't find any on June 2024 GSV, i.e. it seems that one can enter the A19 main route w/o passing a beginning of motorway sign... Likely just due to SS640 construction. I guess that the segment was dedicated as motorway because it was a distributor road. I think that the dedication / signposting is just unclear because the SS640 expressway is still u/c. I assume that OSM and GM are right with indicating SS640 for the segment. I think we should remove A19Cal from HB, and extend SS640 to A19 main route. A19Cal has three travelers. Thus, we need to add alt labels to SS640 and alt route name.
-
I tried to fix the coords and routings reported in the last two posts but did not change wp labels which sometimes look wrong around: https://github.com/TravelMapping/HighwayData/pull/7679
I didn't touch A19 either.
I'll look into it tomorrow again to check that I didn't fucked up anything. It's a pain to have each file twice (ITA + ITA-SAR directory).
Edit: Fix for the fix: https://github.com/TravelMapping/HighwayData/pull/7684
-
@si404 you've added CorUmbI_W + ViaNaz_S to SS389 (https://travelmapping.net/hb/showroute.php?r=ita.ss389&lat=40.579497&lon=9.255901&zoom=17) the other week (https://github.com/michihdeu/HighwayData/commit/223d14d0586ff04620ad27959a510f94d23c95e9#diff-627087e2cb390d1f0e8f0b6af1ec9e0ea46db520a9584f8dc26f76cabe4499d4). OSM does indicate this route and the other route being SS389. GM does only indicate the other route.
What's your source that you've decided to add the wps? Is there a road log for Sardinia?
(I've checked the junction on GSV but maybe I've not looked hard enough)
-
A 5km long expressway was opened today: https://www.skyscrapercity.com/posts/189898242/ It's the extension of what we have in HB as SS195bis (https://travelmapping.net/hb/showroute.php?r=ita.ss195bis&lat=39.142743&lon=9.001708&zoom=14). The road number is not confirmed by GM nor GSV.
-
@si404 you've added CorUmbI_W + ViaNaz_S to SS389 (https://travelmapping.net/hb/showroute.php?r=ita.ss389&lat=40.579497&lon=9.255901&zoom=17) the other week (https://github.com/michihdeu/HighwayData/commit/223d14d0586ff04620ad27959a510f94d23c95e9#diff-627087e2cb390d1f0e8f0b6af1ec9e0ea46db520a9584f8dc26f76cabe4499d4). OSM does indicate this route and the other route being SS389. GM does only indicate the other route.
What's your source that you've decided to add the wps?
I had it the other way, but someone said:SS389Dir (Udduso)'s east end is at the wrong junction (https://travelmapping.net/hb/showroute.php?r=ita.ss389dirudd&lat=40.581171&lon=9.255091&zoom=16).
So I changed it, based on the source of 'michih says I got it wrong'!
-
@si404 you've added CorUmbI_W + ViaNaz_S to SS389 (https://travelmapping.net/hb/showroute.php?r=ita.ss389&lat=40.579497&lon=9.255901&zoom=17) the other week (https://github.com/michihdeu/HighwayData/commit/223d14d0586ff04620ad27959a510f94d23c95e9#diff-627087e2cb390d1f0e8f0b6af1ec9e0ea46db520a9584f8dc26f76cabe4499d4). OSM does indicate this route and the other route being SS389. GM does only indicate the other route.
What's your source that you've decided to add the wps?
I had it the other way, but someone said:SS389Dir (Udduso)'s east end is at the wrong junction (https://travelmapping.net/hb/showroute.php?r=ita.ss389dirudd&lat=40.581171&lon=9.255091&zoom=16).
So I changed it, based on the source of 'michih says I got it wrong'!
You didn't change SS389DirUdd's east end but added two wps only (https://github.com/TravelMapping/HighwayData/commit/223d14d0586ff04620ad27959a510f94d23c95e9#diff-d3962865f25b8314c652cc122899fee988190b6a5d45b5024f948480b3308750). In addition, you added two wps to SS389 (https://github.com/TravelMapping/HighwayData/commit/223d14d0586ff04620ad27959a510f94d23c95e9#diff-627087e2cb390d1f0e8f0b6af1ec9e0ea46db520a9584f8dc26f76cabe4499d4).
From lower zoom (you don't see the 2nd route withSS389 numbers on OSM), the previous draft looked like SS389DirUdd + SS389 were on concurrency just west of SS389DirUdd's east end w/o having a wp at the west end of the concurrency.
If we have no better source, I think we should go with GM i.e. truncating SS389DirUdd to its new wp 'CorUmbI_E' and reroute SS389 via SS389DirUdd's CorUmbI_E wp at http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=40.578438&lon=9.252591.
-
I'll look into it tomorrow again to check that I didn't fucked up anything. It's a pain to have each file twice (ITA + ITA-SAR directory).
Edit: Fix for the fix: https://github.com/TravelMapping/HighwayData/pull/7684
I'm happy with my fixes for my changes to the previous fixes :) I won't update Sardinian wpt files from now (except I'd have point requests during my travels).
-
But I found another issue on a route I wanna travel in Sicily.
SS189 (https://travelmapping.net/hb/showroute.php?r=ita.ss189&lat=37.75&lon=13.606181&zoom=16) is routed through Santa Rosalia but SS189 is clearly signed via the bypass on OSM, GM and 2024 GSV: here (https://maps.app.goo.gl/JSSAGBq87T8LR9T27), here (https://maps.app.goo.gl/QBc4JJuPstyVFYeS9) and here (https://maps.app.goo.gl/k5ckNt4jHXwqfzJs8). In addition SS188 and SS189 do both have a wp at the same junction in Santa Rosalia but with different coords and labels don't indicate the other SS route. The routes meet after a concurrency further north. See attached.
I've just moved SS189 onto the bypass: https://github.com/TravelMapping/HighwayData/pull/7687
-
Sicily
SS640 (https://travelmapping.net/hb/showroute.php?r=ita.ss640&lat=37.465598&lon=14.007955&zoom=15) should be moved onto new alignment west of Caltanissetta.
SS189 (https://travelmapping.net/hb/showroute.php?r=ita.ss189&lat=37.318959&lon=13.587604&zoom=17) south of SS118/SS122 is not indicated on OSM nor GM nor GSV. Truncate?
Just realized that si404 did not process this. Nonetheless, the final SS640 section opened to traffic today (two-way-traffic only though): https://www.skyscrapercity.com/posts/189957106/
https://travelmapping.net/hb/showroute.php?r=ita.ss640&lat=37.493350&lon=14.025893&zoom=14
-
If we have no better source, I think we should go with GM
If we have no better source than Google maps, why should I change it from OSM's routings for mainline SS389 and SS389Dir? Which is what we have!
i.e. truncating SS389DirUdd to its new wp 'CorUmbI_E' and reroute SS389 via SS389DirUdd's CorUmbI_E wp at http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=40.578438&lon=9.252591.
Looking on Streetview, I remembered why I didn't change the routings (instead just adding the points to allow travels along the shortcut and to better shape the route). While the road marked on OSM as SS389 that we don't have in the browser is signed as a shortcut for traffic going between south and west, the SS389 destinations (there's no road numbers signed at all) are signed through the town - you are not directed the way GM has, but rather the way we/OSM has, if you are travelling on the SS389.
There's your better source than Google Maps - Google Maps Streetview!
-
I'm not familar with how Italian practise on road signing but right of way regulations do not mean anything about road dedication in Germany and Austria. If you mean that:
While the road marked on OSM as SS389 that we don't have in the browser is signed as a shortcut for traffic going between south and west, the SS389 destinations (there's no road numbers signed at all) are signed through the town - you are not directed the way GM has, but rather the way we/OSM has, if you are travelling on the SS389.
Your routing follows the priority road at the northern junction (https://maps.app.goo.gl/v7GQXM6GL19AWFuq5). However, the priority road at the southern junction (https://maps.app.goo.gl/UVdMofp7BrY4NbLa6) is between the two "branches".... and your routing follows a one-way street.
-
I'm not familar with how Italian practise on road signing but right of way regulations do not mean anything about road dedication in Germany and Austria. If you mean that:
I never mentioned priority roads and definitely wasn't referring to them. I'm not sure what they have to do with anything here other than some sort of left field attempt to try and keep pushing for the GM route over the signed route.
your routing follows a one-way street.
OK, that's a slight point adjust to deal with the small one-way system, not a fundamental reworking of the route needed due an error.
-
the SS389 destinations
Ah, I misread distinations as directions and... well, if you mean Monti and Nuoro. Fine for me.
-
A 5km long expressway was opened today: https://www.skyscrapercity.com/posts/189898242/ It's the extension of what we have in HB as SS195bis (https://travelmapping.net/hb/showroute.php?r=ita.ss195bis&lat=39.142743&lon=9.001708&zoom=14). The road number is not confirmed by GM nor GSV.
Drove it during my road trip in Sardinia, will come with the next update.
-
I have resumed the work of adding the new SS roads, the first batch from Emilia Romagna should be in after the next site update.
-
I have resumed the work of adding the new SS roads, the first batch from Emilia Romagna should be in after the next site update.
Thanks :) However, you did something wrong (and I merged the PR too quick) (https://github.com/TravelMapping/HighwayData/pull/7726#issuecomment-2359073203) so that itass system must likely be deactivated with tonight's update :(
-
SS20DirA (https://travelmapping.net/hb/showroute.php?r=ita.ss020&lat=44.340089&lon=7.536535&zoom=13) is missing in HB. Signs appeared between 2020 and 2023. West end (https://maps.app.goo.gl/CWyAr8k5mRZEESG77) at SS20 and east end (https://maps.app.goo.gl/rGp54eHphccdaNHV6) at SS705.
-
Not sure about SS28 (https://travelmapping.net/hb/showroute.php?r=ita.ss028imp)'s south end in Imperia. The end of ANAS responsibility sign is at the city boundaries (https://maps.app.goo.gl/e38XxA1rhj8u6Muc6) but we have it further to a roundabout and then to A10. The A10 on-ramp is not dedicated as SS28 for sure but A10. Why do we assume that SS28 should end at A10? I think it would be (historically) more likely to be connected to SS1 downtown. So, should we truncate SS28 to the Imperia city boundaries? Only cinx and me have traveled the route.
-
A 5km long expressway was opened today: https://www.skyscrapercity.com/posts/189898242/ It's the extension of what we have in HB as SS195bis (https://travelmapping.net/hb/showroute.php?r=ita.ss195bis&lat=39.142743&lon=9.001708&zoom=14). The road number is not confirmed by GM nor GSV.
Drove it during my road trip in Sardinia, will come with the next update.
You've only updated the wpt file in the ITA-SAR directory. You need to update the file in the ITA directory too. The latter is still the one in HB.
-
I will continue updating the new roads after the separation of the regions, as the process of syncronisation between the regions and the nationwide SS roads is quite time consuming and prone to errors. Would like to add also the SRs and SPs sometime in the mid-future (next 3 years).
-
Would like to add also the SRs and SPs sometime in the mid-future (next 3 years).
Great :)
Sicily
SS640 (https://travelmapping.net/hb/showroute.php?r=ita.ss640&lat=37.465598&lon=14.007955&zoom=15) should be moved onto new alignment west of Caltanissetta.
SS189 (https://travelmapping.net/hb/showroute.php?r=ita.ss189&lat=37.318959&lon=13.587604&zoom=17) south of SS118/SS122 is not indicated on OSM nor GM nor GSV. Truncate?
Just realized that si404 did not process this. Nonetheless, the final SS640 section opened to traffic today (two-way-traffic only though): https://www.skyscrapercity.com/posts/189957106/
https://travelmapping.net/hb/showroute.php?r=ita.ss640&lat=37.493350&lon=14.025893&zoom=14
Drove it today. The new bypass is signed throughout as SS640. The section from Caltanissetta Sud to SS640dir is still signed as SS640. The section from SS640dir to SP29 is unsigned. The segment from SP29 to SS122bis is closed for traffic now.
The short A19Cal is not signed as such. It's a huge construction site for 2x2 expansion. I'd merge it into SS640.
-
I drove SS71 around Orvieto (https://travelmapping.net/hb/showroute.php?r=ita.ss071&lat=42.709813&lon=12.154484&zoom=13) today. Our routing via the "NW bypass" is wrong according to signs in the field. It's routed through the town, e.g. here (https://maps.app.goo.gl/TkhsinhcL1y8wPi76). I've updated the route in HB (https://github.com/TravelMapping/HighwayData/pull/7762) but I'm not sure via what streets its routed through the historic center. The last km post west of the center is 27.8 (https://maps.app.goo.gl/9gW1MFPpemNmc4YV9). The first km post east of the center is 29.8 (https://maps.app.goo.gl/UauQUoY3WX8puQiJ7). That means, exactly 2.0km. The direct route through the center is 1.7km (https://maps.app.goo.gl/y3ZoF4YsAaj1nfAcA) though. The southern route is 2.2km (https://maps.app.goo.gl/4r5R6U22i8X171Px8). :D
Affected users: cinx panda80 spinoza
-
Should SS205 (https://travelmapping.net/hb/showroute.php?r=ita.ss205&lat=42.717814&lon=12.143337&zoom=16) in Orvieto be extended to SS71 as indicated on OSM and GM? The last km posts are at the A1 ramp here (https://maps.app.goo.gl/TjNWzLYSCXduzomNA) and here (https://maps.app.goo.gl/WC7PAmKu6NLNPu2RA). I couldn't see anything within the town today nor find anything on 2023 GSV. Do we have any official map to clarify it?
Edit: If we get evidence that SS205 does not extend to SS71, we need to rename SS71's SS205 wp.
-
OK, it's been a while since I've checked in here.
As maintenance is ongoing, is Italy kept in a ready-to-split state, as far as everyone knows?
Are we ready for me to start uncommenting the split systems, running sanity checks, and reporting results here?
Say the work word & I can do it.
Unless there's anything else to tighten up first?
-
I've made some fixes but it's all done. I've reported more but I think that panda80 will process it after the split.
There is one small issue open (https://forum.travelmapping.net/index.php?topic=6484) to active systems but I don't mind if we'd postpone that too.
However, I'm not the maintainer. @si404 + panda80* what do you think? Ready to go?
Are we ready for me to start uncommenting the split systems, running sanity checks, and reporting results here?
I'd prefer having a separate thread for those issues that need a quick fix. Just that the other open issues do not get lost.
btw, zaf should also be split. It's less an issue though I think (less travelers and no system in development).
*Just wrote an email to make panda80 aware of it.
-
If I've made changes I've made sure I've done both Italy and the split systems.
-
I'd prefer having a separate thread for those issues that need a quick fix. Just that the other open issues do not get lost.
Not sure what you consider issues that need a quick fix.
What I'll post here will just be what's directly related to getting the split working:
- ErrorList errors.
- Datachecks that'll definitely break stuff, like DISCONNECTED_ROUTE, HIDDEN_SOLO & HIDDEN_SOLO_RTE.
HIDDEN_TERMINUS isn't directly related, but I saw a couple so I'll note those too. Gotta get the new routes usable after all.
I don't foresee addressing any others. - Output from the siteupdate --splitregion sanity check logs.
I'll wait on this till after iterating thru ErrorList items & datachecks till those are all gone. That should minimize the amount of text to have to wade thru here. Maybe even make it zero.
Don't start #2 till #1 looks good; don't start #3 till #2 looks good.
In the meantime, some DISCONNECTED_ROUTE errors & missing concurrencies proved too much for --splitregion mode, and caused siteupdate to crash.
Fixes are in place & working so far, but I need to do a little more testing & tidying up.
-
Do you refer to an issue in your code or in hwy data or.....? Do you expect any action from anyone that is not you? I just ask because my name is output in all lines....
Digging into it, it was an issue in my code. There's nothing necessarily wrong with the underlying hwy data (https://forum.travelmapping.net/index.php?topic=2095.msg36073#msg36073); it's just a situation my code wasn't designed to handle.
No action from anyone other than me.
There were a few cases for 4 other users too; I just included yours because you're participating in this thread.
Anyway...
Things that are not concurrent between ITA + ITA-region abbrev.
Mm. This is central to getting the split working well...
this thread is for itass system only (panda80 is developing).
Gotcha. I don't believe there's a thread specifically for the ITA split, so I've started a new one:
https://forum.travelmapping.net/index.php?topic=6532
-
I've made some fixes but it's all done. I've reported more but I think that panda80 will process it after the split.
There is one small issue open (https://forum.travelmapping.net/index.php?topic=6484) to active systems but I don't mind if we'd postpone that too.
However, I'm not the maintainer. @si404 + panda80* what do you think? Ready to go?
Ready to go from my side. I'm waiting for it, as it will much easier to add the new routes afterwards, not having to syncronize between 2 paths.
-
A bypass of Varna opened to traffic: https://www.skyscrapercity.com/posts/190833170/ It seems to be a SS12-something.
https://travelmapping.net/hb/showroute.php?r=ita.ss012ste&lat=46.735942&lon=11.643265&zoom=16