Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[oscar]

Don't forget "Trail Travel Mapping" for hiking/biking fans like myself. I'd be more than happy to help maintain that site. 

Doesn't hurt that there is a nationwide network of numbered and signed bicycle routes. AASHTO tends to those designations, along with Interstate and U.S. route designations.

[english si]

So do I (saves on domain fees, too), though alas the specific hypothetical domain name Steve threw out seems to be taken. Also, could the separate subdomains be run as separate sites, with minimal coordination to slow things down?

I think universal log in for all sub-domains is almost a must have, even if separate files for each discrete type of route.

Railroads, Roads, Cycling trails and Walking trails would be of a similar format: <region> <route> <from> <to>. Issue here if they are all .list files, though obviously they could become .rail, .road, .bike and .hike files while keeping the same format.

Ferries (.boat) could take the same format, but region is difficult (would, for instance, the Portsmouth-Bilbao ferry enter France, and what purpose would mid-sea points serve?) and so many routes would look weird*. And the routes are fairly hard to map remotely accurately. A binary system with an interface like mob rule's one might work here?

Air travel is a different thing entirely an existing site takes airport codes and airline. It would be silly to have them pre-mapped as there's like a bazillion combinations.

Or bus systems, local and intercity?

The clinched transit thread here showed that buses are frankly awkward due to the routes being in flux a lot of the time. But if some mentalists want to do it, then...

And could we have geographical areas? Obviously US counties would be duplicating mob rule, but mob rule doesn't have countries, or national parks, or whatever. And it fits with our site's theme of mapping where you have been.

*My data would be something like, applying road standards to it (see how repetitive it is):
ENG Dover-Calais Dover GBR/FRA
FRA Dover-Calais GBR/FRA Calais
ENG Portsmouth-Cherbourg Portsmouth GBR/FRA
FRA Portsmouth-Cherbourg GBR/FRA Cherbourg
ENG Portsmouth-StMalo Portsmouth GBR/FRA
FRA Portsmouth-StMalo GBR/FRA StMalo
ENG Poole-Cherbourg Poole GBR/FRA
FRA Poole-Cherbourg GBR/FRA Cherbourg
ENG Plymouth-Roscoff Poole GBR/FRA
FRA Plymouth-Roscoff GBR/FRA Roscoff
ENG Portsmouth-Fishbourne Portsmouth Fishbourne
ENG CowesFloatingBridge Cowes East Cowes
ENG Southampton-EastCowes Southampton East Cowes
ENG WoolwichFerry NorthWoolwich Woolwich
ENG SandbanksFerry Sandbanks Studland
MLT GozoFerry Cirkewwa Mgarr

[english si]

^^ Oh, BTW, cycling and walking are different but overlapping (as are cycling and roads - would driving along this bit of A13 give you the adjecent section of CSH3 (the blue bit), would cycling this bit of CSH3 give you that bit of A13?* Other times the routes aren't segregated by a raised kerb Should the routes be concurrent on our servers and clinching one gives you the other? Massive can of worms and all sorts of work if yes!).

Most of these aren't cycleable. Also,this route E8 is different from this route E8 (OK, it's EV8, but...) and this E8 is very different too. bike.url and hike.url are separate subdomains. As are (arguably) tram.url and rail.url and (obviously) road.url

But all this is getting way ahead of ourselves...

*No and yes, as the A13 would include sidewalks, but the CSH3 is just the cycle superhighway.

[Bickendan]

"MY Travels" is rather too cutesy for my liking. It also fails to specifically describe what is being mapped.

I could go for a rail equivalent although I feel it really needs to be a parallel site that doesn't render stuff on the same maps and whatnot. A LOT of people will care about only one or the other but not both.

So I propose the following two names:
Road Travel Mapping
Rail Travel Mapping

These names accurately describe what the sites do, in words laymen can understand, without sounding ridiculous.

What about ferries (auto-carrying and otherwise), which I'm a fan of including down the road? Or bus systems, local and intercity? The first could be fit into a road travels site, especially auto ferries, but awkwardly.  (But on second thought, roads and ferries might be a decent fit, since ferries run where the roads don't, ferry users often take highways to and from ferry terminals, and as with the Alaska Marine Highway System ferries are sometimes considered an extension of the land road system.)

Road Travel Mapping
Rail Travel Mapping
Ferry Travel Mapping
Bus Travel Mapping
Air Travel Mapping
etc.

Not limiting at all. Expand into as many things as anyone wants. But keep different modes separate because lumping everything together is just going to end up driving users away who don't care about a lot of the stuff.

If the above all existed I would be inputting data for roads, rails, and ferries certainly, but ignoring buses and planes. I would not appreciate having bus routes all show up as unclinched on my maps simply because I don't care to keep track. And I don't really want roads and rails on the same map either.

Ferries meanwhile are interesting since CHM already includes some where they are explicitly part of a numbered route and DOT operated. If we're going to have a side project on ferries it might be nice to cut them out of numbered routes where they are currently included and put them in with all the other non-DOT ferries. This way we can keep a standard that's more physically consistent.

Agree, though having the option to have these various maps overlayed onto each other as discreet layers would be nice. Probably a bit demanding on the coding and processing side, though.

[yakra]

Actually, CHM normally excludes ferries, and cuts into separate segments routes including ferries. The only exceptions I'm aware of in North America (can't speak to Europe) are in one of my domains, the Northwest Territories, for several river crossings on NT 1 and NT 8 that are ice bridges in the winter (so you can drive across as if they were regular roads), and covered by ferries in the summer. There are also a few short ferry crossings, not yet removed (that's on a to-do list), in the draft California state routes set.

There's also CT148 and CT160, drafted before splitting up routes with ferries became the official modus operandi. I've known about them, but just let them be...


Count me as another one on board with splitting up modes of travel onto separate subdomains, keeping things specific, focused, clean & uncluttered, as Duke87, Alps, Oscar and vdeane discussed.
...That is, IF the decision is made to branch out into other forms of travel. I'm really hesitant to open Pandora's Box and make things too unruly and too unfocused. Si's reply #202 has some good examples of why.

But I agree that road and rail systems on the same maps would probably create clutter, in addition to not working for users who care only about one or the other. (Though I can see some people, like me, having some interest in merged maps, such as for Manitoba where I took a train to Churchill from where the primary highway network ends.)

To get ahead of ourselves a bit here, maybe have some functionality on the main top-domain site to make custom maps that include different modes of travel, and maybe even different subsystems therein. Oscar can make one of roads and trains; I can make one of roads and US Bike Routes; Melvin can make one of the NYC subways and the BART...

clinching.com is available.

What's this got to do with sports?
travelclinching.ComNetOrgBBQ?

Or travelclinching travelmapping, as froggie suggested...

[english si]

Count me as another one on board with splitting up modes of travel onto separate subdomains, keeping things specific, focused, clean & uncluttered, as Duke87, Alps, Oscar and vdeane discussed.

And me! both in that I want separate and I have discussed such.

That is, IF the decision is made to branch out into other forms of travel. I'm really hesitant to open Pandora's Box and make things too unruly and too unfocused. Si's reply #202 has some good examples of why.

What good examples? Good examples of why you want separate subdomains, sure, and good reasons for a lack of concurrency between stuff, but not really good examples of why we can't potentially use the software made for roads and have it work for bike. hike. and rail. projects that may or may not come, at a later date. Other things, save mainly boat. remain different or difficult. And the whole point of subdomains is to keep the curtain between networks anyway.

And 'IF' the decision? Yours is the first explicit statement against branching out. It's not that big an if! Certainly the consencious seems to be that we get the road stuff done and, if there's interest and a team (this might be a big 'IF', but seemingly not), other networks might be covered in their own subdomain.

[Alps]

also available: clinching.alpsroads.net
just sayin'

[froggie]

Yakra:  I didn't actually include "clinching" in the name, and I agree with others who suggest we should drop that part of the name.

[yakra]

Oops. Typo/braino. Post edited.

[sipes23]

And if we're willing to go to Nigeria....

travelmappi.ng

I think we'd be required to assist deposed royalty (with a significant cut to us, of course!) if we do that

Thank you for taking note of my humor.

[ntallyn]

But I'm not sure there's programming talent in the people not yet heard from in this thread, which is the most immediate need.

I haven't contributed any comments yet (mostly because I've been in and out quite a bit this month), but I've been in software development for close to 20 years now. And while I haven't used github, I expect it isn't really all that different from our remote git server.

And on a note that was mentioned earlier in the thread, I've been keeping my .list updated with the August route and point names.

Nick

[froggie]

After consultation with a few of the existing collaborators, I have reserved travelmapping.net for the new domain.

[rickmastfan67]

After consultation with a few of the existing collaborators, I have reserved travelmapping.net for the new domain.

You didn't ask me. lol.  I think that should work for a new name.

[Highway63]

There's one collaborator in particular who's done a lot of work in the upper Midwest, and his participation (or at least permissions) might mean less work re-creating route files in his areas.  But I'm not sure there's programming talent in the people not yet heard from in this thread, which is the most immediate need.

You rang?

[SSOWorld]

There's one collaborator in particular who's done a lot of work in the upper Midwest, and his participation (or at least permissions) might mean less work re-creating route files in his areas.  But I'm not sure there's programming talent in the people not yet heard from in this thread, which is the most immediate need.

You rang?

why yes, we did Welcome aboard!

[tckma]

But I'm not sure there's programming talent in the people not yet heard from in this thread, which is the most immediate need.

Just recently discovered this thread off of the CHM website.

I'm a software engineer by trade.  Mostly I do C/C++ work and bash/python shell scripting.  What coding work is needed?

[Jim]

After consultation with a few of the existing collaborators, I have reserved travelmapping.net for the new domain.

Do you have an easy ability to redirect subdomains of that name somewhere?  I'd like to set up the project's forum under something like "forum.travelmapping.net" either on my teresco.org server or on my hostmonster account, but we might as well try to get using the domain we've reserved.  I'd also like to get my temporary URLs for the project as we've all been using them to start using the travelmapping.net name as well.

[froggie]

I can check into that.

[rickmastfan67]

Froggie, Jeff, Mwasleski, & Nick, please check your PMs here please.  Thank you.