Author Topic: Slovenia Glavne Ceste (svng)  (Read 10031 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline si404

  • TM Collaborator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2067
  • Last Login:Today at 12:54:41 am
Slovenia Glavne Ceste (svng)
« on: June 08, 2016, 06:22:29 am »
This system is ready for review.

Offline michih

  • TM Collaborator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4849
  • Last Login:Today at 12:52:03 pm
Re: Slovenia Glavne Ceste (svng)
« Reply #1 on: June 08, 2016, 02:12:49 pm »
Why G1 to G112 only? Is there any reason why G201+ is not included?

Offline si404

  • TM Collaborator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2067
  • Last Login:Today at 12:54:41 am
Re: Slovenia Glavne Ceste (svng)
« Reply #2 on: June 08, 2016, 05:46:55 pm »
Above 199 are Regionalna Ceste.

Offline michih

  • TM Collaborator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4849
  • Last Login:Today at 12:52:03 pm
Re: Slovenia Glavne Ceste (svng)
« Reply #3 on: June 09, 2016, 02:18:22 pm »
Ok but what's your source?

If you're right, they should be a potential tier 5 system.

Offline si404

  • TM Collaborator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2067
  • Last Login:Today at 12:54:41 am
Re: Slovenia Glavne Ceste (svng)
« Reply #4 on: June 09, 2016, 02:34:42 pm »
There is potential for a level 5 system. Whether it would just be the first class regional roads (R2xx) or all three classes I don't know.

Here's a source
http://www.di.gov.si/fileadmin/di.gov.si/pageuploads/Ceste_250_DRSC_2013_pregledna_karta_manjsa.jpg

Offline michih

  • TM Collaborator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4849
  • Last Login:Today at 12:52:03 pm
Re: Slovenia Glavne Ceste (svng)
« Reply #5 on: June 09, 2016, 03:15:12 pm »
Here's a source
http://www.di.gov.si/fileadmin/di.gov.si/pageuploads/Ceste_250_DRSC_2013_pregledna_karta_manjsa.jpg

Thanks :). If I get the legend right, 1-99 are First Class Roads, 100-199 Second Class Roads, 200-299 Regional First Class Roads et cetera.
Why is it handled different to Bulgaria (bgri vs. bgrii)? If it would, it should be like:

violet = snva (tier 1)
red = snvh (tier 2)
orange = snvgi (tier 4)
yellow = snvgii (tier 5)

I think Austria and Switzerland are similar.

Offline si404

  • TM Collaborator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2067
  • Last Login:Today at 12:54:41 am
Re: Slovenia Glavne Ceste (svng)
« Reply #6 on: June 11, 2016, 09:11:01 am »
When I've made the second class Bulgarian roads, I'll probably merge the two systems - other than the number of digits (ditto Slovenia) there's no difference between how the road's number is signed or who maintains it.

Offline si404

  • TM Collaborator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2067
  • Last Login:Today at 12:54:41 am
Re: Slovenia Glavne Ceste (svng)
« Reply #7 on: September 01, 2016, 03:52:05 am »
Any further comments?

Offline michih

  • TM Collaborator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4849
  • Last Login:Today at 12:52:03 pm
Re: Slovenia Glavne Ceste (svng)
« Reply #8 on: September 11, 2016, 10:35:42 am »
G7:
G404 should be R404
G409 should be R409
G630 should be R630

G11:
4 shaping points between CesMarUpo and Sma, 2 per curve?

G102:
Curves with 2 shaping points b/n IdrLog and R207; Looks odd that the southern segment has many shaping points but the northern segment b/c the northern segment which is also curve has no additional shaping point

G104:
G104Men wp should be labeled G104; SELF_REF FP

G105:
Curves with 2 shaping points b/n VinVas and R421

G106:
G106Sma wp should be labeled G106; SELF_REF FP

G107:
G234 should be R234

G109:
Are the R443 wps really required? I've usually excluded wps like this. It's just a simple interchange with A5.

G111:
Additional wp?
PodCes http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=45.507039&lon=13.602115 or
Oba http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=45.503550&lon=13.606074


There is potential for a level 5 system. Whether it would just be the first class regional roads (R2xx) or all three classes I don't know.

G1 to G112 are main routes and R201 to R937 are regional routes. G with class 1 and 2, R with class 1, 2 and 3. All have R prefix and I see no reason why R201 to R937 should only be partially tier 5.

Offline michih

  • TM Collaborator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4849
  • Last Login:Today at 12:52:03 pm
Re: Slovenia Glavne Ceste (svng)
« Reply #9 on: September 11, 2016, 04:24:12 pm »
I've checked G104 on GSV and couldn't find any sign with '104' there. It's signed on GM and OSM though and it's indicated on the official map from http://di.gov.si.

Must the route be removed from HB now? I haven't checked the other routes...

Offline si404

  • TM Collaborator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2067
  • Last Login:Today at 12:54:41 am
Re: Slovenia Glavne Ceste (svng)
« Reply #10 on: September 12, 2016, 07:11:12 am »
It seems these roads are only signed (but are signed) on km posts. I'm going to include them anyway.

Offline si404

  • TM Collaborator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2067
  • Last Login:Today at 12:54:41 am
Re: Slovenia Glavne Ceste (svng)
« Reply #11 on: September 15, 2016, 07:46:47 am »
G104:
G104Men wp should be labeled G104; SELF_REF FP

G106:
G106Sma wp should be labeled G106; SELF_REF FP
No. The manual says:
"Distinguish two different same-bannered same-numbered routes as needed with the 3-letter city abbreviations. Also use the city abbreviation for bannerless same-designation spurs or branches, such as the Zurich A3 spur intersecting the main A3."

Anyway, other than those two, these changes are in. Anymore, or is this system good to go?

Offline michih

  • TM Collaborator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4849
  • Last Login:Today at 12:52:03 pm
Re: Slovenia Glavne Ceste (svng)
« Reply #12 on: September 15, 2016, 03:37:14 pm »
No objections. I think you can finally activate it.

Offline michih

  • TM Collaborator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4849
  • Last Login:Today at 12:52:03 pm
Re: Slovenia Glavne Ceste (svng)
« Reply #13 on: September 18, 2016, 01:47:31 pm »
G104:
G104Men wp should be labeled G104; SELF_REF FP

G106:
G106Sma wp should be labeled G106; SELF_REF FP
No. The manual says:
"Distinguish two different same-bannered same-numbered routes as needed with the 3-letter city abbreviations. Also use the city abbreviation for bannerless same-designation spurs or branches, such as the Zurich A3 spur intersecting the main A3."

Ok, if A111Abc connects A111 and A222, A111 wp should be called "A111Abc".
But should the A222 wp be called "A111" or "A111Abc"?

Quote
Anyway, other than those two, these changes are in. Anymore, or is this system good to go?

Sorry, I thought you always check it but there are still some pending data check errors which are "active" now.