PA: US 15 (Future I-99) Exit Numbers

[Markkos1992]

While I did potentially find a point error for WilRd_S(road name seems to be Boone Run Rd),  I did notice that the Future I-99 exit numbers  on US 15 are not in TM yet though they are fully there. 

Should we just go-ahead and change the points to the new exit numbers?  I did not think to write them down when I drove this on the way to Salamanca Saturday.

EDIT:  I edited this for more detail for the minor point error.

[rickmastfan67]

We don't even have the Future Exit #'s for I-99 along US-220 yet, and those have been posted for several years.

If we're going to do this, we somehow need to recognize that they are indeed I-99's #'s by maybe making the labels in the 'FI-99(#)' style like on the segment of US-74 in NC.  But then again, that case only arised because NCDOT was forced to pull the I-74 shields down, and we had already incorporated the new I-74 exit numbers into US-74's file.

[yakra]

"FI-99(#)" style is a bad idea IMO. It just means another definite set of label renamings, and the associated AltLabel cruft, farther down the road.
I'd just as soon keep the "no exit numbers on US Routes" convention in place until there's a proper Interstate here, for simplicity's sake.

Edit: https://github.com/TravelMapping/HighwayData/pull/2027

[mapcat]

I just as soon keep the "no exit numbers on US Routes" convention in place until there's a proper Interstate here, for simplicity's sake.

There's still a "no exit numbers on US Routes" convention?

[yakra]

There's still a "no exit numbers on US Routes" convention?

Optional. Allowed but not required, as are exit numbers; updating not mandatory.

IIRC There are also a few routes out there with overlapping numeric ranges where moving to numbered labels could be problematic.

[rickmastfan67]

"FI-99(#)" style is a bad idea IMO. It just means another definite set of label renamings, and the associated AltLabel cruft, farther down the road.
I'd just as soon keep the "no exit numbers on US Routes" convention in place until there's a proper Interstate here, for simplicity's sake.

We could still add the exit numbers to the Future I-99 file itself (Mansfield) since we do know the exit numbers are for that route.

[vdeane]

If you do decide to add them to the future interstate file (or in several decades if/when I-99 actually reaches here), I have photo verification of the new numbers northbound on my website.  I also observed that the southbound-only exit for US 15 business (the one north of US 6) is 183.
http://nysroads.com/photos.php?route=us15&state=PA

[Markkos1992]

https://forum.travelmapping.net/index.php?topic=4174.msg22808#msg22808 (restarting this thread from here)

This does make me wonder if I should add the exit numbers to I-99FutMan though (even though it is fully based on Future I-99 and not US 15 at all).

I would say yes to adding them to I-99FutMan's file.

As for US-15's file, we would have 3 ways that we could do it.
1) XX(99) labels
2) FI-99(XX) labels
3) No change till it's signed as I-99.

Only reason I suggested the 2nd option is because of the unique issue we had with I-74 in NC being posted along the Laurinburg Bypass.  Then having NCDOT being forced to yank it by the FHWA along there, but the exit numbers remaining I-74's mileage and not reverting back to US-74 mileage.

I-99FutLoc has exit numbers with US 220 retaining street name labels, so that would seem to be the best option for I-99FutMan for consistency.

I like vdeane's option to stay with consistency.  Doing this means that I just edit I-99FutMan for now, and deal with the rest whenever I-99 truly becomes reality.

It does bother me that ReaRd does not have an exit number with the tabs already being there.

[Markkos1992]

https://github.com/TravelMapping/HighwayData/pull/4608