How can I get started on editing the project?

[neroute2]

btw: mexdfeje system name should be shortened, e.g. mexe or mexme

These are known as "Ejes Viales" and only exist in MEX-DF. We could either treat them as state routes (since Distrito Federal is state-level) or as city routes (since that's how they function; there are none in the rural south half of DF).

If we treat them as state routes, a DF prefix is not enough, since signs have started to appear for other prefixes than EJE (CTO, PERIF, RADIAL, VDCTO).

http://travelmapping.net/hb/index.php?units=miles&u=neroute2&sys=canmbw is the one city route system we have. This might be a decent model; call the system mexdf and the routes df.eje*. If signage improves for the other routes, we can name them df.cto* and such.


But...shit. We may have to change all references across the project from DF to CDMX: "On 29 January 2016, it ceased to be the Federal District (Spanish: Distrito Federal or D.F.) and is now officially known as Ciudad de México (or CDMX), with a greater degree of autonomy."

[michih]

btw: mexdfeje system name should be shortened, e.g. mexe or mexme

These are known as "Ejes Viales" and only exist in MEX-DF. We could either treat them as state routes (since Distrito Federal is state-level) or as city routes (since that's how they function; there are none in the rural south half of DF).

If we treat them as state routes, a DF prefix is not enough, since signs have started to appear for other prefixes than EJE (CTO, PERIF, RADIAL, VDCTO).

http://travelmapping.net/hb/index.php?units=miles&u=neroute2&sys=canmbw is the one city route system we have. This might be a decent model; call the system mexdf and the routes df.eje*. If signage improves for the other routes, we can name them df.cto* and such.

I didn't think much about my mexe and mexme examples. I thought that we talk about numbered routes in the city of "Mexico City" and tried to do it similar to Winnipeg. It's obviously more complex.

[neroute2]

Would it make sense to demote mexd and mexed back to preview? I have so many corrections that I'm sitting on because there's apparently no process for updating an active unmaintained system in a timely manner.

We could do it similar to the split of France. Make a new system first, e.g. mexdr and nexedr. We could test it on the 2nd instance tmtest.teresco.org first. When going live, we could just add entries to system updates like we did for France: mexd re-entered and mexed re-entered.

I think there might be problems with that due to many of the coordinates changing. In France we probably didn't change any, and thus overlaps between old and new worked.

[michih]

I think there might be problems with that due to many of the coordinates changing. In France we probably didn't change any, and thus overlaps between old and new worked.

That coordinates didn't change caused a problem for HDX. The MEX change is less critical here.
Changes like we are facing with MEX are always a hassle to users. The split of France was simpler than the previous split of Spain and Germany since we had yakra's tool. ESP+DEU list file entries had to be "converted" manually. Line by line... We had set up the new systems on tmtest server and I could compare manually to production server and figure out the new user list lines. Mexico will be more tricky since you cannot compare the total region mileages because the whole routes will change - if I got you right.