Travel Mapping

Highway Data Discussion => Updates to Highway Data => Solved Highway data updates => Topic started by: Jim on June 04, 2022, 10:35:42 pm

Title: OR: OR39 point on OR 39
Post by: Jim on June 04, 2022, 10:35:42 pm
Looks like there are two OR 39's that intersect in Altamont, leading to a LABEL_SELFREF datacheck error.  I haven't kept up with the best practice here.  Should the point be renamed or the datacheck error be marked as FP?
Title: Re: OR: OR39 point on OR 39
Post by: Bickendan on June 05, 2022, 04:14:26 am
I'd have to check what OR 223's labels in Dallas are for its identical situation is.
Title: Re: OR: OR39 point on OR 39
Post by: michih on June 05, 2022, 04:33:16 am
I haven't kept up with the best practice here.

OR39: OR39 -> OR39Kla
OR39Kla: OR39 should be marked FP
Title: Re: OR: OR39 point on OR 39
Post by: rickmastfan67 on June 05, 2022, 05:15:16 am
I haven't kept up with the best practice here.

OR39: OR39 -> OR39Kla
OR39Kla: OR39 should be marked FP

Did the same with FL-295 & FL-295WPe.
https://travelmapping.net/hb/showroute.php?r=fl.fl295
https://travelmapping.net/hb/showroute.php?r=fl.fl295wpe
Title: Re: OR: OR39 point on OR 39
Post by: Jim on June 05, 2022, 09:06:35 am
Thanks, updated the labels:

https://github.com/TravelMapping/HighwayData/commit/cff7b13fcbcdea202f773b12ef6580580e380725

Not touching OR 223 but it might need some tweaks.
Title: Re: OR: OR39 point on OR 39
Post by: yakra on June 05, 2022, 10:18:30 am
OR39: OR39 -> OR39Kla
Yes.
OR39Kla: OR39 should be marked FP
This doesn't get flagged as an error (https://travelmapping.net/devel/datacheck.php?sys=null&rg=OR&showmarked=on) anymore, so there's nothing to mark FP. :)

Did the same with FL-295 & FL-295WPe.
https://travelmapping.net/hb/showroute.php?r=fl.fl295
https://travelmapping.net/hb/showroute.php?r=fl.fl295wpe
This matches best practice. Here, there's a graph connection and the label matches what's expected from the .list name, so siteupdate doesn't flag an error (https://travelmapping.net/devel/datacheck.php?sys=null&rg=FL&showmarked=on) here anymore. The FP entry was removed (https://github.com/TravelMapping/HighwayData/pull/5628/files#diff-13c9ecddac0a10342743f86b1ce92df11ef88540d12941350145ec4d5aa1d02bL4256) when the LABEL_SELFREF changes were made.

I haven't kept up with the best practice here.  Should the point be renamed or the datacheck error be marked as FP?
There will still be the occasional FP, but these are far fewer than before. Most of the cases that used to be FPs are no longer flagged as errors at all now.
For items that do get flagged, the Info column on the datacheck page (https://travelmapping.net/devel/datacheck.php?show=LABEL_SELFREF&showmarked=on) indicates the underlying cause, linking to the bullet points here (https://travelmapping.net/devel/manual/syserr.php#LABEL_SELFREF) for info about what can be done to fix an error before marking FP.
Most of the time, there will be another fix available other than marking FP. (In fact, I believe only the NO_COLOC subtype should ever need to be marked FP.)
So yes, OR39 -> OR39Kla was the right thing to do here (https://travelmapping.net/devel/manual/wayptlabels.php#abbrev).
Title: Re: OR: OR39 point on OR 39
Post by: michih on June 05, 2022, 10:45:13 am
OR39Kla: OR39 should be marked FP
This doesn't get flagged as an error (https://travelmapping.net/devel/datacheck.php?sys=null&rg=OR&showmarked=on) anymore, so there's nothing to mark FP. :)

Yep :) One easily forgets those great improvements but only remembers the hassle we had to deal with it manually (FP entries) in the past.
Title: Re: OR: OR39 point on OR 39
Post by: Jim on June 05, 2022, 11:46:41 am
Thanks, I'm running another update now to see this and my WA NMP fixes/FPs before I move on to another state.