Travel Mapping
Highway Data Discussion => Updates to Highway Data => Solved Highway data updates => Topic started by: yakra on December 15, 2019, 12:11:58 pm
-
E18/Vt1 and Vt10 don't intersect directly, and the Hameenramppi (EN: "skirt ramp") designation is actually (https://www.google.com/maps/@60.455213,22.2922357,3a,15y,320.36h,91.83t/data=!3m9!1e1!3m7!1sy_SA1llOaAYIAKxQeg0X8A!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!9m2!1b1!2i40) signed (https://www.google.com/maps/@60.4550466,22.2948615,3a,21.8y,78.95h,98.14t/data=!3m10!1e1!3m8!1sU48L083T1Lk3KxxCP0LYiQ!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo1.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DU48L083T1Lk3KxxCP0LYiQ%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D178.51588%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i13312!8i6656!9m2!1b1!2i40).
-
Hameenramppi is signed at both ends as (and not as 'TO' with dashed border) the route at the other end of it. It seems really stupid to label these points with "skirt ramp" - ie something that's part of the junction.
I'm pretty sure that what's there currently is per the manual:
There are common exceptions to positioning at centerline crossings, such as interchanges where ramps connect nearby, non-intersecting highways, or where a short access road connects a road to another with a trumpet or similar interchange. In these cases, the waypoints for the same interchange on the separate highways cannot be at the same coordinates. Instead, the waypoints should be where the connecting ramps or access road interchange with each highway.
I'm highly surprised there aren't a load of these threads as this type of junction is relatively common. Add in the trumpet interchange (often off toll roads) and the like and there should be hundreds. I'm wondering how this one ended up being singled out.
Finland needs a periodic overhaul anyway, so I might revisit it - I would want to research the freeway-style sliproad between the two routes and when it closed.
-
Fair enough. I wasn't certain what with the translation of the ramp name, but with the road name for Vt10 being Hameentie, I thought I'd toss this one out there.
I'm wondering how this one ended up being singled out.
I was testing out a new datacheck on lab2. On E18, the colocated point with Vt1 was detected, and no colocation with Vt10, so the '0' after "Vt1" was flagged as suspicious.
Changed it to ignore suspicious digits, as there were too many FPs & barely any real errors. It did result in a few (http://forum.travelmapping.net/index.php?topic=2490.msg16814#msg16814) other (http://forum.travelmapping.net/index.php?topic=3400.0) posts (http://forum.travelmapping.net/index.php?topic=3401), though.
Here's (http://205.209.84.174/devel/datacheck.php?show=UNEXPECTED_STRING) where the datacheck is at now...
-
Is there anything still to do?
-
No. Marked solved.