Mapping 6+ lane freeways

[cockroachking]

I was looking at NY for an AARoads thread a couple days ago and noticed that someone added the Newburgh-Beacon Bridge to it.  Should that be included?  It meets the two mile length, but WB the right lane is closed outside of rush hour so that it can be used as a shoulder (this is the typical configuration, making it arguable that this is actually five lanes with shoulder running.

I added it after some waffling. My thoughts were that if the part-time lanes are always physically there, they should count, but if they're reversible and thus not there when traffic flows the other way, they shouldn't count. But I can't really argue strongly either way.

That and I'm not sure that most people actually obey the lane signs unless the Bridge Authority cones off a lane or something.

IMO it is a shoulder, since it is not in use for a large majority of the day. Also, I have never seen anyone illegally using the shoulder as a lane in the 1000+ times I have been over the bridge. Not that it never happens, but I have never seen or heard of it myself.

[neroute2]

Several segments are not currently being mapped due to missing points or routes:
MO I-170: exit 9B
NJ 21: 3rdAve
NM US 70: RinBlvd
TX I-10: 548
TX US 281: BorDr
BC 1: 61

NY JFKExpy
TX WurPkwy
AB AirTrl, GleTrl, MacTrl

[rickmastfan67]

Can also add the following SC I-85 segment:

98 (now closed) -> 106

StreetView from 2023 shows that segment has had it's widening to 3 lanes each way completed, and opened to traffic.

So, would gain another ~8 miles for the project.

[Jim]

I started to look into the issue relevant to this side project about how Mapview and Showroute display travels when a list file uses a hidden point as an endpoint of a marked segment (as would be desirable to improve the accuracy of the 6-lane maps and stats).  My initial thoughts are the existing GitHub Issue related to the differences in Mapview and Showroute in this context.

https://github.com/TravelMapping/Web/issues/629

[Jim]

To help with an experiment that might allow more accurate mapping of the 6-lane segments, could someone pick just a few spots where 6-lane segments begin/end that are not at currently visible points and add hidden points of the form +6Lxxx at those places, and update `6lanetest.list` to use them for the affected route(s)?  I'm trying a change that I hope will make this look accurate on the maps in Mapview and Showroute.

[Bickendan]

Do you mean a hidden point like on I-5 as noted earlier in the thread?

[Jim]

Do you mean a hidden point like on I-5 as noted earlier in the thread?

Yes. 

If someone has a better suggestion for the format of such points, I'm open to it.  It would need to start with + followed by 2-3 fixed characters, followed by anything else that would be used to avoid name conflicts.

[Markkos1992]

If someone wants to do this with I-76 and I-476, you have my permission to do so. I presume it is only those routes affected in PA. Just link to the pull request so I can see it.

[Markkos1992]

I added ran4sh's update to my pull request from earlier today.

https://github.com/TravelMapping/UserData/pull/9536

https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=33329.msg2865779#msg2865779

[yakra]

hidden points of the form +6Lxxx at those places, and update `6lanetest.list` to use them for the affected route(s)?  I'm trying a change that I hope will make this look accurate on the maps in Mapview and Showroute.

+ followed by 2-3 fixed characters, followed by anything else that would be used to avoid name conflicts.

I don't get it; why the specific nomenclature? All hidden points can be used in a .list (a few examples are in #629), and any mapview/showroute fix shouldn't be limited to a subset of them.

[Jim]

I have to admit I've forgotten the details.  I am unsure if this is still an issue after the railways-related modifications.