autl5: Salzburg Landesstraßen

[michih]

Alright well I said I'd bang this out, here we go.

Thanks

AUT L101-5: Bra/Sal -> Obe/Sal (using Oberösterriech as the basis since that's the level of jurisdiction border relevant here)

My thoughts on this:

General questions

 - about border points: You've gone with the lower level Bezirke names, rather than the Länder, but these are Länder systems, so shouldn't the border labels be Länder-based, rather than Bezirke-based? I guess it's awkward as you'd have AT4/AT5 format if you go with ISO-3166-2, but Obe/Sal formats would work (Obe for Oberösterreich) as O/N, O/S (or O/Sbg) is not great.

The road list of Tyrol has them listed by Bezirk (district) and the very first "border" occurance on drafting was a district border where the road number changed. Was it the one Chris recently mentioned (last pic)? Thus, I thought I should always use district names to be consistently.

I think that there were more road number changes at district boundaries but not many. However, I implemented district names all over Austria whereof two are already active.
Another argument against state names is, that we have not split Austria into TM regions.

[michih]

https://github.com/TravelMapping/HighwayData/pull/7117

AUT L118-5: suggest removing the AuStr and RaiStr points, these are functionally only ends of a one-way pair

I'd like to keep them because L118 is only via the one-way street. There is no opposite pair. Thus, one would need the wps if heading southbound only.

AUT L208-5: needs a couple other segments added as the road crosses the Salzburg/Upper Austria border six times. Only the longest segment is mapped currently.

Not sure how strict we should be with that border since it is not a "TM region border". Nonetheless, I added the segments since the source map does also clearly indicate three segments.

AUT L209-5: could use a few extra shaping points west of Gaißau to capture that big swooping switchback
AUT L213-5: could use a couple shaping points east of Weng
AUT L246-5: could use a couple shaping points to capture the large switchback

I'm not a fan of those wps. The rule says "consider adding a few more". It sounds to me like an optional "could". I'd like to keep it as-is.

AUT L210-5: B159_Vig -> B159_N; B159_Str -> B159_S
AUT L253-5: B156_Ach -> B156_N; B156_Leh -> B156_S
AUT L255-5: B156_HolW -> B156_W; B156_HolE -> B156_E
AUT L270-5: B311_Esc -> B311_W; B311_Bir -> B311_E
AUT L272-5: B178_UnkS -> B178_S; B178_UnkN -> B178_N

I know that it is not covered by rules since 3-letter suffixes are only allowed "If more than two points ... are needed". It is/was a Si-thing to distinguish those point from concurrency wpts. We added the 3-letter suffixes when Si was reviewing autb back then. I must admit that I sometimes like it and sometimes don't. For instance, I only use them when there are appropiate "town labels" for the suffix. I want to be consistent for Austria.

AUT L210-5: RomStrNord -> RomStr

Removed since I only added "Nord" because I thought that you'll request it. I wonder why you want to omit it?

[Duke87]

AUT L210-5: RomStrNord -> RomStr

Removed since I only added "Nord" because I thought that you'll request it. I wonder why you want to omit it?

Per labeling guidelines:

Ignore any non-essential direction specifier. N. 6th St becomes 6thSt. 33rd Avenue SW becomes 33rdAve. W. Seedy Lane becomes SeeLn.

Nord seems to be a "non-essential direction specifier" here.

[michih]

^^ Thanks

Any further comments from you or can we go ahead and activate the system?

[Duke87]

I've made all my comments so if you've addressed them all, activate away.


Re: L118, I did notice that it appears to officially follow a one-way street northbound only, so that particular matter depends on how much of a strict constructionist you want to be. My take in this type of situation (which I have encountered in drafting stuff elsewhere, most notably Costa Rica) is that there must be an implied southbound routing even if officially the route is northbound only for that one block, and I'd map it accordingly. But there isn't an actual rule about this and it's your system so do as you please.

[michih]

I've made all my comments so if you've addressed them all, activate away.

Except of jurisdiction border labels, shaping points and 3-letter suffixes as described above. If that's fine for you, I'll activate the system.

[Duke87]

Yeah those are also cases where while I'd do things differently, ultimately it's your call since it's your system in your region.

[michih]

Thanks. System will be activated with the next site update