SH587: SH587 & SH587_End -> directional suffixes
SH587_End -> SH587_N
SH587 -> SH587_S
Those new labels look ok to you? Will submit when my next batch of ONS files are ready.
I'd flip them around actually.
These aren't multiplex splits, but just the southern & northern intersections with... itself.
https://travelmapping.net/devel/manual/wayptlabels.php#underscoreJust to add some confusion,
the #loopsuffix rule appears from context to be about beltways, and not about a route intersecting just itself & nothing else. Having no specific rule for these cases, they'd be treated as normal intersections with normal rules applying -- in this case, #underscore.
Been getting down into the weeds on this stuff with my recent work
on LABEL_UNDERSCORE...
My current thinking is, if a route intersects itself, continue to flag an error if the label just references itself without an underscore or slash afterwards, on the grounds that the route will by necessity have >1 intersection, and need an _ or a / to disambiguate. The LABEL_SELFREF error would provide a gentle reminder to change to one or the other.
Example:
Right here,
AL126_E is good but vanilla
AL126 should become
AL126_W.
FP potential:
This is legit by my understanding of the manual -- no need to disambiguate
TD12, with the other point being labeled
MR4.
SH548: What's with the SH548_D & SH548_V labels?
Each segment gets it's own 'letter' on that island. Thought it was easier to just use those letters to ID which segment was which there. https://goo.gl/maps/oRgf9gswtb72YjFi7
There's also 'U', 'F', 'H', 'M', and a few others. And some of the segments don't even have cardinal directions posted, just the 'letter' instead.
Yikes, so like, a variation on
this theme?
I'd think, no need to get into letter suffixes (other than directional) unless there's 3+ to disambiguate. Signage notwithstanding, no need to confuse matters by adding nonstandard suffixes not in the manual.
With this also being a loop like SH587 & many others, normal intersections, yadda yadda, #underscore.
The question then becomes, is the "relative position ... along the route" the "signed" D & V, or a more intuitive (assumed) S & N based on the overall orientation of points in the rile?
"Rile?" I think I was trying to type route & file at the same time; was definitely debating which word to use. LOL.
