frabfcdXX: Bourgogne-Franche-Comte Routes Départementales

[michih]

Hi, I was wondering how you want to handle multiple routes at the same waypoint.

For example, D1, D1D, and D103 all intersect:

D1's point is D1D/D103
D1D's point is D1/D103
but D103's point is just D1, without D1D

Is this something you would want me to report in the peer review, or is it not important since the manual does not require it?

Thanks for pointing that out. I don't remember where si404 and me agreed on that. I simply dropped the child number if the parent number is already used in the label name throughout France. To avoid making the labels too complicated.

[cenlaroads]

Ok.  I'll note any I find just in case you want to add them later.

[michih]

I think that there are many. I won't add them. We would end up with wps like D999/D1234E10 for no good reason. No need to note them...

[cenlaroads]

That works for me.  I won't worry about them.

[cenlaroads]

frabfcd21 - Côte-d’Or Routes Départementales

No errors noted in data check list.  There are no unmarked NMPs.  Concurrencies look good in HDX.  I'll continue to check those as I review the routes.


Reviewing the routes through D6E:


D1:  D4J_N -> D4J_W and D4J_S -> D4J_E
D1:  D4_S -> D4_W and D4_N -> D4_E

D1A, D1B, D1C, D1D, D2, D2sav, D2A, D3, D3B, D3C - All good

D3D:  Add point at the partial interchange with D903B
D3D:  Add point at Route de Savigny.  This seems to be the only way to access D903B southbound in this area.

D4:  Maybe add a point at Chemin du Pont St. Jacques since there are few bridges across the river in this area
D4:  D36/D954 -> D954_W - the concurrency with D36 continues south of here

D4A, D4B, D4C, D4D, D4E, D4F - All good

D4G:  D4_S -> D4_W and D4_N -> D4_E

D4H:  D36_N -> D36_W and D36_S -> D36_E

D4J, D4K - All good

D4L:  Reverse the waypoint order?  It seems more north-south

D4Land - All good

D4M:  D9_E -> D9_N and D9_W -> D9_S
D4M:  Consider replacing shaping point +X16 with a point at RueRoc

D5:  D101_W -> D101_N and D101_E -> D101_S
D5:  D29_E -> D29_N and D29_W -> D29_S

D5A - All good

D5B:  The route is extending into Yonne and ending at D965 of that system; Should be truncated to the department border

D5C - All good

D5D:  Also extending into Yonne; needs to be truncated

D5E:  RueEgl appears to be an unmarked driveway for the church.  Move point to RueCit or RueCha

D5F, D6 - All good

D6die:  There is no graph connection with D901_E

D6A, D6B, D6C, D6D, D6E - All good

[michih]

https://github.com/TravelMapping/HighwayData/pull/8372

D1:  D4J_N -> D4J_W and D4J_S -> D4J_E
D1:  D4_S -> D4_W and D4_N -> D4_E
D4G:  D4_S -> D4_W and D4_N -> D4_E
D4H:  D36_N -> D36_W and D36_S -> D36_E
D4M:  D9_E -> D9_N and D9_W -> D9_S
D5:  D101_W -> D101_N and D101_E -> D101_S
D5:  D29_E -> D29_N and D29_W -> D29_S

There is no 'signed direction'. Please explain why you think I should change them.

D4:  Maybe add a point at Chemin du Pont St. Jacques since there are few bridges across the river in this area

All are very small roads. I don't think that anyone would ever need that wp.
btw, I often tried to find matching points on routes were intersecting roads lead to. It's not a rule but my practise. That would mean, I also had to add a wp to D4J. This could to a domino effect...

D1:  D4J_N -> D4J_W and D4J_S -> D4J_ED4L:  Reverse the waypoint order?  It seems more north-south
D4Land - All good

If we see both D4L segments as one route, it's more west-east

D5B:  The route is extending into Yonne and ending at D965 of that system; Should be truncated to the department border

Departement boundaries are tricky, and just as everything in France, highly depending on the departements' practise. I'm either gone with official coords (not available for BFC), departement signs at the boundary (often off from OSM's boundary lines), change in pavement or any marking (if GSV was available) or what's indicated on OSM/GM. I usually spent quite some time to find the best boundary locations (not for the first systems drafted (FRA-IDF) but once I got familar with the practise).
It's rare that routes extend far into the other departement like D5B but it's clearly signed at D965. Yonne does have a D5 but far away from D5B's location. Thus, I don't think that D5B is a child of Yonne's D5.

D5D:  Also extending into Yonne; needs to be truncated

I'm gone with this small marking.

D6die:  There is no graph connection with D901_E

I think it's OK since there is a short connection road b/n both. Not 1PPI: https://travelmapping.net/hb/showroute.php?r=frabfc.d000621die&lat=47.516636&lon=5.073173&zoom=17

[cenlaroads]

D1:  D4J_N -> D4J_W and D4J_S -> D4J_E
D1:  D4_S -> D4_W and D4_N -> D4_E
D4G:  D4_S -> D4_W and D4_N -> D4_E
D4H:  D36_N -> D36_W and D36_S -> D36_E
D4M:  D9_E -> D9_N and D9_W -> D9_S
D5:  D101_W -> D101_N and D101_E -> D101_S
D5:  D29_E -> D29_N and D29_W -> D29_S

There is no 'signed direction'. Please explain why you think I should change them.

I was basing it on the guidance here, where it says to use the relative position of the waypoints along the route whose file is being made.  However, looking at the link you provided, now I understand that the rules are different when identical waypoints result from multiplexes as opposed to when they result from multiple intersections without multiplexes.  I was thinking of the suffix as always identifying the waypoint.  So, disregard these suggestions


The other points you mentioned make sense.  Thanks for the clarification about departmental boundaries.  Is that small arrow commonly used to mark them?

[cenlaroads]

frabfcd21 - Côte-d’Or Routes Départementales

D16 (Sombernon) appears to be missing a concurrency with D6 all the way to Lamargelle on its north end.  It is signed in Larmargelle.


Reviewing routes D7 through D9M:

D7:  D9/D16_E -> D9_E, D9/D16_W -> D9_W  -  D7 is concurrent with D16 here

D7B, D7C - All good

D8:  D8A - recenter
D8A:  D8 - recenter

D8B, D9 - All good

D9A:  D8/D954 -> D9/D954

D9B, D9C - All good

D9D:  It is signed past RueEgl at least as far as here

D9E, D9F, D9G, D9H, D9J, D9K, D9L, D9M - All good