Non-Road Boards > Travel Mapping

Travel Mapping Highway Data Folder system

(1/3) > >>

english si:
Existing collaborators - how would you want the data arranged?

Jim:
I just voted "By (sub)region and then by system" but it's not a strong preference over system then (sub)region.  I would like to see more of a hierarchy than the data folder from CHM, though.  I don't think our choice here makes much difference in the big picture from an implementation point of view, but will make it easier (I hope) to wade through all of the data manually.  More find-grained control also might lead to a better way to permit various contributors to pull/merge into the mainline things from only the (sub)regions where they are the primary caretaker.

english si:

--- Quote from: Jim on May 02, 2015, 12:38:56 PM ---I just voted "By (sub)region and then by system" but it's not a strong preference over system then (sub)region.
--- End quote ---
I just did the reverse. I like your points about easier to find if done by system.

Big systems (KY state routes, LA state routes, GB A roads, etc) that have been added by subsystem could be split. Easier to have the 1500+ English files (mostly A roads) in folders with a maximum of about 400 files in them.

Actually, I'm convinced. Option 3 over Option 2.

oscar:
How would we handle the csv/index files for systems spanning multiple regions/subregions, if we split primarly or only by (sub)region? International European Roads is the most obvious one, but maybe also affected would be national systems such as the Trans-Canada Highway and U.S. Interstates.

froggie:
TCH and US Interstates could be remedied by making the sub-regions "Canada" and "U.S.".  Not sure offhand for the European E-routes.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page