NJ/PA: I-95, I-295, & I-195 exit number and route renumbering

[Markkos1992]

The issue I am having right now is that the "40" label that needs to be moved for the new interchange is in use. 

The "40" label is currently in-use by the following list files:  golubcar (added his after the Golden Spike list so he is good) and crosboro7 (should be contacted to note that his list file will technically be off, it should not actually be broken).  The "40" label will be replaced by "39" as a result of the renumbering of the PA 413 interchange.

I hyperlinked the link to all the new exit numbers for reference purposes.


Other current revisions to I-95 in PA:

Changed 21 to 22A.  I could not tell if the label was for the ramps to/from the connector to I-676 or the on-ramp SB from Front St, but in the grand scheme of things seem to be more related to Exit 22 than a non-existent Exit 21.

Changed 36 to 37.  The exit for PA 132 is actually Exit 37.

EDIT:  This should definitely be in the site update for tomorrow night.  -Mark

[yakra]

Re exit 40, this looks like one of those cases where list files will just be unavoidably broken by a major reroute.

[Markkos1992]

Re exit 40, this looks like one of those cases where list files will just be unavoidably broken by a major reroute.

Well I am not seeing myself actually breaking list files as much as them being incorrect. (having 40 now on I-95 instead of 39 would gain a little distance incorrectly)

Some list files in this case may have the line "PA I-95 DE/PA PA/NJ" without having actually traveled the former I-276.  That is one of my biggest concerns here.

I did use alternate labels past the truncation point for I-276 and for I-95 at Exit 40 for its old routing. 

[Jim]

Generally we do what we can to avoid breaking things, but sometimes they just need to break and that's what the updates entries are for.  I think we've gone above and beyond in those special cases where we have contacted people directly by email or GitHub.  Also, TM users are probably pretty likely to be aware of this change and would notice if they need to fix things.  Am I correct that everyone who traveled I-95 north of the new interchange will need a new PA I-295 entry anyway, since we can't use an alt name here like we do in many cases when a route's number changes?

[dave1693]

Am I correct that everyone who traveled I-95 north of the new interchange will need a new PA I-295 entry anyway, since we can't use an alt name here like we do in many cases when a route's number changes?

As one of the folks who had previously clinched both I-276 and I-95 in PA, I've been assuming all along that I'd need a new entry for I-295. (And that the HB will show me as having clinched I-95 even though I haven't traveled the new connector ramps yet.)

[SSOWorld]

Re exit 40, this looks like one of those cases where list files will just be unavoidably broken by a major reroute.

Well I am not seeing myself actually breaking list files as much as them being incorrect. (having 40 now on I-95 instead of 39 would gain a little distance incorrectly)

Some list files in this case may have the line "PA I-95 DE/PA PA/NJ" without having actually traveled the former I-276.  That is one of my biggest concerns here.

I did use alternate labels past the truncation point for I-276 and for I-95 at Exit 40 for its old routing.

When these things happen, the risks are high, but we can't avoid it.  Go with it, the list files can be fixed.

[Markkos1992]

https://github.com/TravelMapping/HighwayData/pull/2250

Marking as solved unless yakra or myself missed something.

[Jim]

On site!

[oscar]

My new entry PA I-295 I-95/276 PA/NJ isn't generating an error in my log, but also isn't showing the new route as clinched by me in the HB.

Maybe this problem will go away on its own, overnight?

[Jim]

My new entry PA I-295 I-95/276 PA/NJ isn't generating an error in my log, but also isn't showing the new route as clinched by me in the HB.

Maybe this problem will go away on its own, overnight?

The update you submitted to your list came in just after the site update started.  I let the update run to completion, but I'll launch another now as you're not the only update.

So my run as the sole traveler on PA I-295 will last all of about an hour.

[Markkos1992]

My new entry PA I-295 I-95/276 PA/NJ isn't generating an error in my log, but also isn't showing the new route as clinched by me in the HB.

Maybe this problem will go away on its own, overnight?

The update you submitted to your list came in just after the site update started.  I let the update run to completion, but I'll launch another now as you're not the only update.

So my run as the sole traveler on PA I-295 will last all of about an hour.

Yeah I had hoped that I would have more time for my update.  Oh well.

[oscar]

My issue, at least, was solved by the second update.

[Jim]

And now I-295 PA has three travelers.  I expect we'll see that number climb quickly.  I didn't check how many people had those segments marked as part of I-95, but I'm sure it's a lot.

[Jim]

One day later, it's up to 10.  Lots of list files updated today, about 3x the typical.

[Markkos1992]

Unmarked as solved, and moved back into highway thread due to alternate label issue.

See conversation beginning here:  http://forum.travelmapping.net/index.php?topic=2758.msg12275#msg12275

Pull Request in Repository: https://github.com/Markkos1992/HighwayData/pull/112