Non-Road Boards > Travel Mapping

Highway Data Discussion (CHM/TravelMapping)

(1/66) > >>

Jim:
Here are a few things I needed to fix up with the import of the last known good CHM data into the new system's database.  I don't know if they should be a concern.


* CA 44 was in usaca.csv, but no wpt exists.  Removed entry.
* A whole bunch of usaky4.csv entries had no corresponding wpt file.  Removed entries.
* In order to avoid name conflicts, I removed NM 599 from usansf.csv.  I expect usanm is among the systems that will go active almost as soon as we have a usable system, so I'm not too worried about that.

Bickendan:
CA 44's wpt should exist, but somehow it fell through the cracks when I first sent the batch to Tim way back when. I might have a copy floating around. I'll research this when I get home.

oscar:

--- Quote from: Jim on June 10, 2015, 10:20:28 AM ---Here are a few things I needed to fix up with the import of the last known good CHM data into the new system's database.  I don't know if they should be a concern.


* CA 44 was in usaca.csv, but no wpt exists.  Removed entry.
* A whole bunch of usaky4.csv entries had no corresponding wpt file.  Removed entries.
* In order to avoid name conflicts, I removed NM 599 from usansf.csv.  I expect usanm is among the systems that will go active almost as soon as we have a usable system, so I'm not too worried about that.
--- End quote ---

Since usaca.csv is for an in-development system, and that csv file needs a lot of other work, can we wait on this for awhile?  I can do some work on this in the short gap between when I get back home from my current trip and when I hit the road again for a month later in Junemonth. But ISTM that our focus for now should be on active systems, and that my efforts for now should be catching up with a lot of updates for active Quebec routes (several Autoroutes, and one related TCH change) plus a few changes on active California and BC routes.

You could remove ak.ak98.wpt from the csv file for the in-development Select Provincial Highways system, to clear the way for putting it back in the in-development Alaska State Highway system, as you're doing for NM 599.

Jim:
I don't want to rush any in-development system - they're just being read in and added to the DB.  If usaca isn't in the kind of shape we should be doing even that, it's easy enough to take it out for the next DB generation run.  In very preliminary .list processing code, I'm just reporting a log file warning and otherwise ignoring valid entries that refer to in-development systems.

english si:
1) lets get it up and running with the old data as was - who cares if usaca needs a lot more work, etc - having CA1 will help with long routes (being the longest) and having indev systems helps test that mapping.

2) obviously updating active systems should be a priority (I'm currently going through Spain checking E roads routes as I'm bored of proofing and updating the Autovia/Autopista files. It's a lot easier if you reject 'signed as such, but not from the mainline' as old routes) over fixing in dev systems.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page