itass: Italy Strade Statali

[panda80]

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.

[michih]

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) so that itass system must likely be deactivated with tonight's update

[michih]

SS20DirA is missing in HB. Signs appeared between 2020 and 2023. West end at SS20 and east end at SS705.

[michih]

Not sure about SS28's south end in Imperia. The end of ANAS responsibility sign is at the city boundaries 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.

[michih]

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. 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.

[panda80]

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).

[michih]

Would like to add also the SRs and SPs sometime in the mid-future (next 3 years).

Great

Sicily

SS640 should be moved onto new alignment west of Caltanissetta.
SS189 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.

[michih]

I drove SS71 around Orvieto today. Our routing via the "NW bypass" is wrong according to signs in the field. It's routed through the town, e.g. here. I've updated the route in HB 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. The first km post east of the center is 29.8. That means, exactly 2.0km. The direct route through the center is 1.7km though. The southern route is 2.2km.

Affected users: cinx panda80 spinoza

[michih]

Should SS205 in Orvieto be extended to SS71 as indicated on OSM and GM? The last km posts are at the A1 ramp here and here. 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.

[yakra]

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?

[michih]

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 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.

[si404]

If I've made changes I've made sure I've done both Italy and the split systems.

[yakra]

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.

[yakra]

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; 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

[panda80]

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 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.