Status of Travel Mapping

[oscar]

Do I need to modify files for all the highways that intersect 41 between Green Bay and Milwaukee so that the waypoint is I-41 with US41 as a hidden name?

That would be recommended, especially if they removed the US-41 at the on-ramps themselves and just have I-41 shields now.

I'll put in a pull request to add Jeff's files to the GitHub master, once I synch his Interstate and bannered US routes .csv file changes with the ones yakra just made down in Arkansas (we just happened to be working on the same files at roughly the same time). Label changes for routes intersecting the part of I-41 that once was non-Interstate can be done separately and later.

I would leave alone labels for intersections with the parts of I-41 west or south of Milwaukee. Those segments are concurrent with I-94 or I-894, and the labels in intersecting route files already include one of those I- numbers.

[Wadsteckel]

Hi Jim, et al,
Driving in Maine for my job, I decided one day to take "that Haynesville Road" (trucker song "Tombstone Every Mile"), US 2A, to get up to Easton for a load of McCain fries.  I planned to clinch it, but when I got to Houlton, I found that it continued on Bangor St instead of bearing right to meet US1/US2 at the corner as it shows on CHM/TrvMap.  Any chance to update that, or do you need more info?
Thanks,
-Ed S.

[yakra]

I'll look into it.

[yakra]

MDOT GIS shapefiles have US2A bearing right onto Military St. The most sensible route to have eastbound traffic link up to the parent route, IMO.

GMSV: Nothing eastbound approaching the Bangor/Military split, though this may have changed by the time you passed thru. Westbound Military St has a single-headed arrow for US2A instead of a double-headed one. While there's plenty of signage at US1/2 & Bangor, there's also a US2A sign on westbound Military. Just enough ambiguity added into the situation, as I see it.

Signage can be sloppy at times in Urban Compact Municipalities. For example, back before it was moved onto I-295 in 2007, US1 in Portland was signed on both Valley St and Saint John St. Elsewhere, the northbound alignment was signed to the west of the southbound alignment, taking Forest Ave all the way to Park Ave. I took this latter example as an effort to guide traffic a bit closer to the central business district. I see the signage at Military & US1/2 similarly guiding traffic to/from the CBD. Less as gospel. (MDOT likes to omit [TO] signs.) Thus I agree with Cameron Kaiser's assessment that the signs "are probably indicating the through route but not necessarily the actual alignment."

I'm going to go with what's in the shapefiles and leave this route as-is.

[Jim]

A site update has just completed with lots of upper midwest updates including the addition of I-41.  Thanks to Jeff for doing them and Oscar for getting it all into GitHub. A number of .list file updates are also included.  See the updates page for details of newsworthy changes.

[Jim]

A site update has been run with lots of Texas updates, including new interstates there, and lots of Europe changes.  Plus, .list updated received since the weekend.  See the updates page for details of newsworthy changes.

[Jim]

Site update just complete with some more Europe and Texas, and a couple .list submissions.

Edit 10:30 PM EDT: now some Oklahoma, too.

[michih]

A site update has been run with lots of Europe changes.

What's that?

15-09-10   Switzerland   A821   che.a821   New Route

[Jim]

The 10 new or updated .list files have been processed - welcome to the 8 new users!

Fun fact: the .sql file that is generated by the site update program to populate the database is now 1,982,562 lines long.  Which update will push it past the 2,000,000 mark?

The very good news: even as the data grows, it still takes only about 5 minutes to run the program and under a minute each for file transfer and database repopulation.  Scalability so far is better than I hoped.

[michih]

What's that?

15-09-10   Switzerland   A821   che.a821   New Route

Seems to be corrected to A861.

My log file contains:

Code Select Expand

System deua by region:
  CHE: 0.00 of 0.53 mi (0.0%)
  DEU: 7809.47 of 8035.38 mi (97.2%)

0.53 mi of the German Autobahn network are in the Switzerland now?

btw: Thanks for the European updates

[english si]

0.53 mi of the German Autobahn network are in the Switzerland now?

What else would you consider that route? All the hobbyist sites consider it an extension of the German road to the north. I'm very open to renaming it.

[michih]

0.53 mi of the German Autobahn network are in the Switzerland now?

What else would you consider that route? All the hobbyist sites consider it an extension of the German road to the north. I'm very open to renaming it.

I would call it A861 or Zubringer Rheinfelden as part of the Swiss network because the road is in the Switzerland! It's not an extraterritorial road but the Swiss traffic regulation is in force there.

[english si]

I would call it A861 or Zubringer Rheinfelden as part of the Swiss network because the road is in the Switzerland! It's not an extraterritorial road but the Swiss traffic regulation is in force there.

If it's A861, then it's part of the German numbering system and thus part of deua. cf pa.ny017, etc. It's in Switzerland in TM by virtue of being che.a861!

Zubringer Rheinfelden in eursf makes sense - I call it that.

At the rate I'm getting through the files, Germany ought to be brought up to date by the end of tomorrow!

[michih]

At the rate I'm getting through the files, Germany ought to be brought up to date by the end of tomorrow!

Cool. I already clinched the new A4, A21, A26 and A66 sections  .

Poland will be a challenge.

[english si]

I've made pull requests for Germany and Austria, leaving just Sweden, Portugal (which I've mostly done, but need to check whether or not a load of the A roads are actually signed) and Poland to bring up-to-date in Europe.

[Jim]

A site update is just complete with several new .list files and lots more Europe updates from Si.

[Wadsteckel]

MDOT GIS shapefiles have US2A bearing right onto Military St. The most sensible route to have eastbound traffic link up to the parent route, IMO.

GMSV: Nothing eastbound approaching the Bangor/Military split, though this may have changed by the time you passed thru. Westbound Military St has a single-headed arrow for US2A instead of a double-headed one. While there's plenty of signage at US1/2 & Bangor, there's also a US2A sign on westbound Military. Just enough ambiguity added into the situation, as I see it.

Signage can be sloppy at times in Urban Compact Municipalities. For example, back before it was moved onto I-295 in 2007, US1 in Portland was signed on both Valley St and Saint John St. Elsewhere, the northbound alignment was signed to the west of the southbound alignment, taking Forest Ave all the way to Park Ave. I took this latter example as an effort to guide traffic a bit closer to the central business district. I see the signage at Military & US1/2 similarly guiding traffic to/from the CBD. Less as gospel. (MDOT likes to omit [TO] signs.) Thus I agree with Cameron Kaiser's assessment that the signs "are probably indicating the through route but not necessarily the actual alignment."

I'm going to go with what's in the shapefiles and leave this route as-is.

Hi Yakra,

Thanks for verifying.  I had another run that took me through Houlton in the last week or so (drove from Calais to Easton), and to make sure I had the road clinched, I drove straight onto Military St then made the tight right turn onto Bangor, then left back onto US1/US2.  FWIR, I can't say for sure if I saw a sign heading eastbound to that intersection.  I went with what we had here.  I don't plan to take the route again anytime soon. 

Regards,
-Ed S

[michih]

I've made pull requests for Germany and Austria

Thank you! 

Some notes:

Germany   E422 wrong link a422 --> e422
Germany   E42 wrong link a042 --> e42
Germany   E36   deu.e26 wrong link e26 --> e36
(UK) England   A5115 Date missing

What's new? Links do not work:
Austria   A12 (Landecker Tunnel)   aut.a012lan   New Route
Austria   A13 (Innsbruck)   aut.a013inn   New Route
Austria   A14 (Bregenz)   aut.a014bre   New Route
Austria   A23 (Inzersdorf)   aut.a023inz   New Route

Austria   A2 (Klagenfurt)   aut.002kla   Route extended at east end from L77 to B91 wrong link "a" missing; are you sure that this part is A2, source?

The new 1.6km A30 section in Bad Oeynhausen is still missing (opened in March 2014).

[Jim]

I've made pull requests for Germany and Austria

Thank you! 

Some notes:

Germany   E422 wrong link a422 --> e422
Germany   E42 wrong link a042 --> e42
Germany   E36   deu.e26 wrong link e26 --> e36
(UK) England   A5115 Date missing

What's new? Links do not work:
Austria   A12 (Landecker Tunnel)   aut.a012lan   New Route
Austria   A13 (Innsbruck)   aut.a013inn   New Route
Austria   A14 (Bregenz)   aut.a014bre   New Route
Austria   A23 (Inzersdorf)   aut.a023inz   New Route

Austria   A2 (Klagenfurt)   aut.002kla   Route extended at east end from L77 to B91 wrong link "a" missing; are you sure that this part is A2, source?

The new 1.6km A30 section in Bad Oeynhausen is still missing (opened in March 2014).

I just pulled in and ran an update with changes Si submitted for these last night.

[michih]

I just pulled in and ran an update with changes Si submitted for these last night.

Thanks . My questions are clarified too.

[oscar]

I was doing Utah and thought it was ready to go. We'd addressed all the peer review issues AFAIK.

Anyone want to do some double checks?

Also, if he hasn't done so already, Nick should check for any new state routes, or other changes requiring updates to existing route files, after UT was peer-reviewed. A good idea for all the in-dev systems, but especially in a high-growth state like Utah.

One thing to check for, on all in-dev systems: whether there have been U.S. routes changes that affect intersecting state routes, while a draft system was on a long hold. I'm coming across what may be some such changes in my double-check (still underway) of Jim's New Mexico route set. It would be good to make sure we're up-to-date on the existing systems in a state, before activating a new state route system there.

[Jim]

One thing to check for, on all in-dev systems: whether there have been U.S. routes changes that affect intersecting state routes, while a draft system was on a long hold. I'm coming across what may be some such changes in my double-check (still underway) of Jim's New Mexico route set. It would be good to make sure we're up-to-date on the existing systems in a state, before activating a new state route system there.

This is an important point.  Before I drafted the usanm set, I updated and otherwise fixed up the existing systems.  Of course, that was more than three years ago now with the delays and eventual dormancy of CHM, so I'm not surprised Oscar is finding so many things.

Another important point is that anyone can take on the job of prepping an in-dev system for activation, if the person who drafted the set is unable to do so for whatever reason.  I do think any such effort should be "claimed" here in this forum or in our new forum when it comes online to avoid redundant work. 

[SD Mapman]

So with the Wahoo bypass now open,

http://fremonttribune.com/news/local/wahoo-bypass-is-scheduled-to-open-tuesday/article_3f3c1f90-8562-5332-9f0d-5d68171d4961.html

does that necessitate a reroute of US 77 and NE 92?

[yakra]

So with the Wahoo bypass now open,

http://fremonttribune.com/news/local/wahoo-bypass-is-scheduled-to-open-tuesday/article_3f3c1f90-8562-5332-9f0d-5d68171d4961.html

does that necessitate a reroute of US 77 and NE 92?

Thanks! I was waiting for confirmation that it was open.

[Jim]

Site update finishing up now with a few minor highway data updates and .list file updates submitted today.  We're up to 55 .list files being processed.