Multiplex exit numbers

[Bickendan]

US 93 and 95 use different exit tags for their overlaps on I-11 and 515.
93: x-y(z)
95: z(y)

I prefer the x-y(z) format as it quickly spells out the dominant route's classification, but both routes should use the same format, regardless of which one it is.
Having to use both I-11(15b) and 15b(11) for the same point is a bit ridiculous. Should codifying one as standard be needed? (Outside of I-105/OR 126, I use the x-y(z) format; 105/126 both share a 0 for the overlap, so neither route references the other for their exits).

Sidenote: CA 99 uses both formats still -- I-5(221) and then z(y) for the US 50[Bus 80/I-305]/I-5 overlap in Sacramento.

[oscar]

US 93 and 95 use different exit tags for their overlaps on I-11 and 515.
93: x-y(z)
95: z(y)

This was discussed previously. The basic difference is that US 93 doesn't have its own exit numbers anywhere in Nevada, while US 95 has non-concurrent exit numbers north of I-15. So different provisions of the "rule book" apply.

Sidenote: CA 99 uses both formats still -- I-5(221) and then z(y) for the US 50[Bus 80/I-305]/I-5 overlap in Sacramento.

CA doesn't have a lot of internal consistency on exit number labels, which will need to be straightened out later (both for usaca and the various active systems). But I-5(221) isn't an exit number on a concurrency, but rather is the exit where CA 99 begins; (221) is only to distinguish that exit from those on the I-5/CA 99 concurrency in Sacramento.