Travel Mapping

Highway Data Discussion => In-progress Highway Systems & Work => Topic started by: yakra on January 21, 2018, 02:10:00 pm

Title: canmbp: Manitoba Provincial Roads
Post by: yakra on January 21, 2018, 02:10:00 pm
Primary data sources / Canonical Shapefiles

Geometry / coordinates / GISplunge:
NRN_MB_6_0_ROADSEG (http://ftp.geogratis.gc.ca/pub/nrcan_rncan/vector/geobase_nrn_rrn/mb/nrn_rrn_mb_shp_en.zip), dated 2016-06-06
(As opposed to the 6.0 shapefiles dated 2013-04-11 or 2013-11-04...  :o)

Up-to-date routing and alignment info:
http://mli2.gov.mb.ca/roads_hwys/shp_zip_files/trn_lrs_highway_network_2016_shp.zip


Post Index
2xx (http://tm.teresco.org/forum/index.php?topic=2344.msg8756#msg8756) | 3xx (http://tm.teresco.org/forum/index.php?topic=2344.msg8757#msg8757) | 4xx (http://tm.teresco.org/forum/index.php?topic=2344.msg8758#msg8758) | 500+ (http://tm.teresco.org/forum/index.php?topic=2344.msg8759#msg8759)
Title: Re: canmbs: Manitoba Provincial Roads
Post by: yakra on January 21, 2018, 02:11:15 pm
MB200 - 299

Route Numbers:
200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 209
210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218
220 221 222 224 225 227 229
230 231 232 233 234 236 237 238 239
240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248
250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 259
260 261 262 264 265 266 267 268 269
270 271 272 273 274 275 276 278 279
280 282 283 285 287 289
290 291


NRN only (deleted?)
235: Deleted; folded into MB68

210: North-South? Not completely. (https://www.google.com/maps/@49.6789219,-97.1307643,3a,19.6y,117.1h,88.08t/data=!3m9!1e1!3m7!1sb0p3qlYDfFEkc5i-XQWmSQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!9m2!1b1!2i41)
221: MB412 -> 6W
227: add point for former MB412
229: SegDump and cherry-pick +X877424 location: replaced with +x94870-12
233: add MB326
280: SegDump and cherry-pick +x26 location: replaced with +x95008-8

https://www.google.com/maps/@50.5368166,-100.0694701,3a,15.8y,226.81h,88.79t/data=!3m9!1e1!3m7!1sVMMMrsEe8upPpX74k1lSJw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!9m2!1b1!2i41

canmb fixes:
TCH16: MB242Spr -> MB242Wes
TCH16AMin: recenter MB262_N
MB6: add MB237_W S. Moosehorn; MB237 -> MB237_E
MB8: MB409 -> MB220
MB9: MB409 -> GraRd
MB10: MB283 -> MB283/285
MB17: extend N to MB224
MB26: MB221 -> JubRd
MB44: add MB238


Put sk.mb291.wpt in the right directory!
Title: Re: canmbs: Manitoba Provincial Roads
Post by: yakra on January 21, 2018, 02:11:19 pm
MB300 - 399

Route Numbers:
300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309
310 311 312 313 314 315 317 319
320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329
330 331 332 334 336 338
340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349
350 351 352 353 354 355 357 359
360 361 362 363 364 365 366 367
373 374 375
384
391 392 393 394 395 396 397 398 399


Unsigned or decommissioned:
300

307: Use ER## labels (compare MB309)
344: Use original endpoint / maybe tweak to closest NRN coords with QGIS
354: Do not use JctSnap endpoint
355: No MB264 duplex
366: NRN vs LRS
373Nor: trim OldMB373 points?

https://www.google.com/maps/@49.7219783,-95.2467409,3a,15y,135.24h,89.25t/data=!3m9!1e1!3m7!1sAmAxDavhpI5VSpFvtPp1yA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!9m2!1b1!2i41

canmb fixes:
MB3: MB346_N -> MB346; MB346_S -> 106W
MB7: add MB321_W N. Stony Mountain; MB321 -> MB321_E
MB7: add MB323
MB17: add MB325_W
MB21: MB343 -> DandRegRd
MB68: MB360 -> 82W
Title: Re: canmbs: Manitoba Provincial Roads
Post by: yakra on January 21, 2018, 02:11:23 pm
MB400 - 499

Route Numbers:
403 404 405 406 408 409
410 411 415 416 417 418 419
421 422 423 424 425 426 427 428
430 432 433 435
440 442 443 444 445 448 449
450 452 453 455 457 458 459
462 463 464 465 466 467 468 469
470 471 472 474 475 476 478
480 481 482 483 484 485 486 487 488 489
490 491 493


Unsigned or decommissioned:
412, NRN flavor, MB26 northward toward Meadows: 1992 Great Decommissioning
412, LRS flavor, MB224 northward to Jackhead: "Other Roads" per hwy map; no GMSV

NRN only (deleted?)
401: No LRS arc, hwy map, or GMSV (only connects to 204 & 202; HodRd in both)
420: renumbered to 426 2007 (http://www.gov.mb.ca/mit/maparchive/2000/2007.html)-2008 (http://www.gov.mb.ca/mit/maparchive/2000/2008.html); fix label on MB14
434: No LRS arc, hwy map, or GMSV, no point on MB3, no problem

LRS only (new?)
426: renumbered from 420 2007 (http://www.gov.mb.ca/mit/maparchive/2000/2007.html)-2008 (http://www.gov.mb.ca/mit/maparchive/2000/2008.html); fix label on MB14
483: Good to go
493: Good to go

417: Do not use gisplunge endpoint
482: Use OSM for provincial boundary

canmb fixes:
MB9: add MB410
MB26: MB412 -> MeaRd


Put sk.mb482.wpt in the right directory!
Title: Re: canmbs: Manitoba Provincial Roads
Post by: yakra on January 21, 2018, 02:11:32 pm
MB500+

"Off-label" color code (http://tm.teresco.org/forum/index.php?topic=62.msg1123#msg1123) key:
not drafted
drafted; to be gisplunged
gisplunged; not checked
gisplunged & checked
done


Route Numbers:
500 501 502 503 504 505 506 507 508 509
512 513 518 519
520 521 524 525 528
530 532
541 542 543 545 547 549
564 566 567 568 569
571 575 577 579
582 583 584 588
591 592 593 594 596
636


NRN only (deleted?)
585: 1992 Great Decommissioning
586: 1992 Great Decommissioning; fix label on MB83
587: Decommissioned in 2006

524: find better End label in graph view <--Either that's the wrong route number or I already did?

canmb fixes:
TCH1: add MB501
MB6: recenter MB518
MB10: MB628 is unsigned; fix label
MB11: add MB502
Title: Re: canmbs: Manitoba Provincial Roads
Post by: oscar on January 21, 2018, 02:36:18 pm
Anything on the supposed PR 636 in Churchill (http://www.alaskaroads.com/MB636-sign_DSC9829.jpg) (isolated from the rest of the highway network, so it wouldn't appear in any files for other routes)? It wouldn't surprise me if that non-standard route signage on the airport road was contrived by locals, to impress the royals when they visited Churchill, rather than proof that it's part of the provincial road network.
Title: Re: canmbs: Manitoba Provincial Roads
Post by: yakra on January 21, 2018, 03:39:41 pm
All I know right now is, there's no "636" value in the RTNUMBER1 field anywhere in the (Edit: GeoBase NRN) shapefiles.
I'll look into it some more.
Title: Re: canmbs: Manitoba Provincial Roads
Post by: yakra on January 22, 2018, 05:51:40 pm
I am satisfied that MB636 exists.
https://www.ec.gc.ca/ee-ue/app/cepae2.cfm?lang=En&screen=Search/Search&ReportID=4
  (Enter "PR 636" (with quotes) in the Filter items box.)
https://twitter.com/TownofChurchill/status/868920627343880192
  ("Launch Road" specifically may be the locals being imprecise? If OSM has the Kelsey Blvd / Launch Rd changeover right, Launch Rd looks a bit suspect, per the highway map...)
And finally, the Official Highway Map (http://www.gov.mb.ca/mit/map/), maps # 10 (http://www.gov.mb.ca/mit/map/pdf/map10.pdf) and 11 (http://www.gov.mb.ca/mit/map/pdf/map11.pdf) clearly show a 2 Lane, Paved Provincial Road (http://www.gov.mb.ca/mit/map/pdf/legend.pdf).
Resolution is low, though; pinning down the endpoints may be difficult. (Or not -- see below...)
Looks like a relatively new designation (you were there in August 2013? (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=10403)), a bit new to be showing up in the GeoBase NRN shapefiles yet. They seem a bit slow to get updated; for example the latest revision has yet to catch up with a section of MB236 being decommissioned (http://tm.teresco.org/forum/index.php?topic=9.msg4887#msg4887).
OK, I found some LRS -Road Network shapefiles from Manitoba Land Initiative (http://mli2.gov.mb.ca/roads_hwys/index.html). And there's a road shown in Churchill... DESCRIPTIO = "Bernier St to Old Airport Terminal Rd (Churchill)", ROAD_IDENT = "Access Road" rather than "Provincial Road", but nonetheless I bet this is it. East end roughly here (http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=58.75952&lon=-94.06367).

Trail of breadcrumbs:
http://mli2.gov.mb.ca/ / http://mli2.gov.mb.ca/app/register/app/index.php / http://mli2.gov.mb.ca/mli_data/index.html / http://mli2.gov.mb.ca/roads_hwys/index.html
Title: Re: canmbs: Manitoba Provincial Roads
Post by: oscar on January 22, 2018, 07:05:40 pm
I went, in August 2013, on a polar bear viewing tour east of Churchill (alas, I didn't see any bears, it wasn't high season for them). I think we went east of the airport, so I probably clinched PR 636 on the tour's shuttle bus to the "tundra buggies" taking us into bear habitat.

That is, unless PR 636 also extends west of downtown Churchill (I saw no route signs in that direction). I walked a short distance west of town toward the port and its grain elevators, but couldn't cover much ground before I had to catch the train back to Thompson.

BTW, the rail line to Churchill is now closed indefinitely due to extensive trackbed damage. Until that's fixed, visitors to Churchill will need to get there by air.
Title: Re: canmbs: Manitoba Provincial Roads
Post by: yakra on January 22, 2018, 11:13:45 pm
Out of curiosity, do you remember where you say the 636 shield? Churchill has GMSV, dated Oct 2013, after your visit, but I haven't found it yet.
From what I can make out, the east end is pretty close to the edge of what I'd call downtown.
BerSt http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=58.770217&lon=-94.175803
JamAve http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=58.766328&lon=-94.165268
+x1381-51 http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=58.744600&lon=-94.104237
AirRd http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=58.753102&lon=-94.083608
OldATRd http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=58.759511&lon=-94.063701

You've probably got all of that?
Title: Re: canmbs: Manitoba Provincial Roads
Post by: oscar on January 23, 2018, 02:58:16 am
GMSV shows the 80kmh speed limit/PR 636 sign assembly I photographed, about 0.33 mi. SE of JamAve:

Sign http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=58.763655&lon=-94.157810

It's easy to miss except at high zoom levels, as whatever vehicle GMSV was using didn't take photos at the usual frequency, and the set closest to the sign is right alongside it so you need to use the next set to the northwest.

I did cover the entire route when I was in Churchill, on foot and/or in a shuttle bus.
Title: Re: canmbs: Manitoba Provincial Roads
Post by: yakra on January 23, 2018, 04:06:11 pm
Aah yes, there ya go. I checked near the east and west ends, but nothing quite that far out of town on this side.
Title: Re: Clinched Routes Highway Shields
Post by: oscar on February 02, 2018, 03:34:01 pm
Not to get too far ahead (canmbs is still being drafted), but Manitoba secondary route markers come in several flavors, not just the one in the photo yakra linked.
Title: Re: Re: Clinched Routes Highway Shields
Post by: yakra on February 03, 2018, 12:21:38 am
Got any links? They might just be old/outdated shield styles...
For example, follow the link above, and switch over to the May 2009 imagery.
Title: Re: Re: Clinched Routes Highway Shields
Post by: oscar on February 03, 2018, 05:37:10 am
The 2009 imagery you cite matches the style (bison centered on one line, Manitoba on a separate line) I've seen in various places, such as in this 2013 photo in Thompson of an End PR 391 sign at the north end of PTH 6 (http://www.alaskaroads.com/MB391-south-end-sign_DSC9874.jpg), and a 2015 photo at the other end of PR 391 in Lynn Lake (http://www.alaskaroads.com/MB391-west-end_DSC6383.jpg), as well as one near Minnedosa (http://i.imgur.com/mKcZwi8.jpg) and another one there (http://i.imgur.com/Q0hRDKy.jpg). For something that seems to be an even older style, see that second Minnedosa photo, as well as another 2015 photo in Lynn Lake (http://www.alaskaroads.com/MB397+MB391_DSC6382.jpg).
Title: Re: canmbs: Manitoba Provincial Roads
Post by: yakra on February 03, 2018, 03:12:45 pm
I wanna say those are just old shield styles, and can be disregarded.
I suggest using the one in http://www.gov.mb.ca/mit/map/pdf/traffic_signs.pdf as the current, canonical version

When the time comes I can use Inkscape to extract the shield image objects from the PDF, and save as an SVG.
It should be more straightforward than canmb, with no awkwardly-sized or centered characters.
Title: Re: canmbs: Manitoba Provincial Roads
Post by: oscar on February 07, 2018, 05:47:15 pm
My next pull request for cansk will add the remaining SK primary routes that connect to MB Provincial Roads. My endpoints for those SK routes are tentative. When you've drafted the corresponding MB routes, I'll resynch the SK endpoints to your MB endpoints.

I'm nowhere near finished with drafting the cansk route files.
Title: Re: canmbs: Manitoba Provincial Roads
Post by: yakra on February 07, 2018, 08:29:11 pm
My endpoints for those SK routes are tentative. When you've drafted the corresponding MB routes, I'll resynch the SK endpoints to your MB endpoints.
255 257 275 283 345 363 394 478 545 547 549 571
283: +X545324
Title: Re: canmbs: Manitoba Provincial Roads
Post by: oscar on February 07, 2018, 09:50:18 pm
Some of the routes you listed end at SK secondary routes, or SK unnumbered roads. Here are most or all of the ones connecting to SK primary routes (1-399), from south to north:

PR 345 -> SK 361
PR 257 -> SK 48
PR 571 -> SK 308
PR 478 -> SK 22
PR 547 -> SK 381
PR 363 -> SK 5
PR 283 -> SK 9

PR 394 connects to a short and super-isolated 900-series SK secondary route. It'll be a long time, if ever, before I do anything with the 9xx northern secondary routes.

PR 291 appears to cut through a corner of SK, on the south side of Flin Flon. I saw no route number signage on the SK side, when I drove almost all of the route in 2012 (missed about a block or two on the MB side due to construction). I wasn't planning to draft a route file for that segment, but am curious whether the shapefiles include it in PR 291.
Title: Re: canmbs: Manitoba Provincial Roads
Post by: yakra on February 08, 2018, 04:31:46 am
PR 291 appears to cut through a corner of SK, on the south side of Flin Flon. I saw no route number signage on the SK side, when I drove almost all of the route in 2012 (missed about a block or two on the MB side due to construction). I wasn't planning to draft a route file for that segment, but am curious whether the shapefiles include it in PR 291.
It's included as PR 291. Oddly enough, in the MB, rather than SK, dataset. None of the ends of the individual arc records appear to correspond to the provincial boundary.
Note how the Google and OSM boundaries differ pretty significantly, with OSM running directly north-south, and Google following a more diagonal path down toward Channing Drive.
Boundary shapefiles downloaded here (http://www12.statcan.gc.ca/census-recensement/2011/geo/bound-limit/bound-limit-2011-eng.cfm) correspond to the boundaries shown in Google; The boundaries in the GeoBase NRN files (near Channing Drive, or PR 394) more closely correspond to OSM. The difference is pretty significant up by PR 394 too. This could get annoying... :(
Topo maps on MyTopo (http://mytopo.com/maps/index.cfm) also correspond to OSM near PR 394. Imagery isn't available everywhere; no luck near Flin Flon.
Title: Re: canmbs: Manitoba Provincial Roads
Post by: yakra on February 08, 2018, 05:10:18 am
SK/MB http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=49.386964&lon=-101.392608
SK/MB http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=49.842456&lon=-101.417625
SK/MB http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=50.328895&lon=-101.477067
SK/MB http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=50.638862&lon=-101.508849
SK/MB http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=51.080863&lon=-101.539078
SK/MB http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=51.404949&lon=-101.570628
SK/MB http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=53.746463&lon=-101.771246
Title: Re: canmbs: Manitoba Provincial Roads
Post by: yakra on February 13, 2018, 06:11:50 pm
A couple things to get sorted before the first batch of devel routes hits the HB...
Ping oscar, rickmastfan67, anyone else who might have an opinion here...



System Code:
http://clinched.s2.bizhat.com/viewtopic.php?p=11626#11626
Quote from: Tim on Mon Jun 18, 2012 9:15 pm
Canadian systems in more detail:
...
canmbs - MB secondary prov. hwys. 200-999; prefix MB
I'm leaning away from using Tim's old proposed canmbs system code, and toward calling it canmbp instead.

The usual convention for secondary systems in the US & Canada is CountryCode+RegionCode+a letter denoting the name of the system.
cannbc (Collector) | cannbl (Local) | cannst (Trunk) | cannsc (Collector) | usatxl (Loop) | usatxs (Spur) | canmbw (Winnipeg) | cannss (Scenic)
For usamts, the system name is "Montana Secondary State Highways", so that's legit.
For usanes, what I had in mind was for the 's' to do double duty and signify both "Secondary" and "Spurs".


Non-secondary systems in specific multi-system regions follow this convention as well:
canqca (Autoroute) | cannba (Arterial) | usakyp (Parkway) | usanyp (Parkway)

usaush (Historic) & usausb (Bannered, even if "Bannered" is not in the system name itself makes sense) also fit into this scheme.

The only real outlier(s) = cannsf (Freeways), and possibly canonf (Freeways again; is there another potentially more appropriate name for this system (not proposing this be changed)?), both so named by Tim in 2009 or so, back before much thought had been given to multiple systems in a state/province, and before the system code conventions we're using now had fallen into place.
In modern times, there's just canabs. Here, "Secondary Highways" is more of a historic designation, with the nomenclature carrying on informally/colloquially. Seemed as good as any system code, with "Alberta Provincial Highways 1-216" and "Alberta Provincial Highways 500-986" being the system names for AB.

Outside North America, IIUC this same convention largely holds, with most system codes being Country/RegionCode+a letter or 2 denoting the name of the system. (Right?)

I don't anticipate there being any strong objections to calling the Provincial Roads canmbp instead of canmbs.
Thoughts, comments?



Route names & point labels:
Oscar has consistently used a "PR 555" style nomenclature when posting about these routes on this forum. (Although he did say "MB 391" on AARoads (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=10403) once...)
This seems to be the prevailing convention in Manitoba from what I can see, and FWIW OSM/Mapnik also uses "PR 555" style.

Should I keep with the existing MB555 convention, or use PR555 style route names & point labels?

If we do go down that road, relabeling points on active systems, including accounting for in-use labels, can by done via a program, similar to the TNs -> TN relabeling in Tennessee. An easy task.
Title: Re: canmbs: Manitoba Provincial Roads
Post by: si404 on February 14, 2018, 07:54:22 am
Changing the system name is a good thing - I approve.

I did the same change from MTs123 to SR123 on waypoint names and have done similar changes in Europe. I'd say yes, go for it - as you say it's an easy task!
Title: Re: canmbs: Manitoba Provincial Roads
Post by: oscar on February 14, 2018, 09:59:58 am
I see no problem with the system name change, or the label changes, for Manitoba provincial roads. But I have no interest in following suit in Saskatchewan, which has two secondary systems (municipal roads 600-799, provincial roads 900-999). For waypoint labels where they intersect provincial highways (1-399), I've been using SK___ and plan to stick with that.

The online mapping of both secondary route systems is particularly iffy (especially the northern 9xx routes), and diminishes any interest I might have in developing them as new systems.

Title: Re: canmbs: Manitoba Provincial Roads
Post by: yakra on February 14, 2018, 02:29:30 pm
Quote
I see no problem with the ... the label changes, for Manitoba provincial roads.
Are you in favor of the changes, or do you simply not object? ;)

I don't suggest similar relabeling be done in SK. SK is a different beast, and different naming/labeling conventions will be appropriate there -- SK___ may in fact be the best one. You know more about SK than I do.
Title: Re: canmbp: Manitoba Provincial Roads
Post by: julmac on February 17, 2018, 01:13:41 pm
Out of simplicity, my preference is to refer to all systems in SK and MB as SK*** and MB*** in the waypoints, regardless of the official system name, as there are no overlaps in the numbers.

For what it's worth, I also prefer "Twp Rd" and "Rge Rd" over TR and RR. The "TR274" format has no meaning to me. The "Twp Rd 274" format is also consistent with how it appears on road signs.
Title: Re: canmbp: Manitoba Provincial Roads
Post by: yakra on February 27, 2018, 11:14:39 pm
Out of simplicity, my preference is to refer to all systems in SK and MB as SK*** and MB*** in the waypoints, regardless of the official system name, as there are no overlaps in the numbers.
One vote to use MB***, one "I see no problem", and one "yes, go for it"... Anyone else?
I don't have any problems with continuing to use MB*** either, hence putting it before the group. FWIW I've been continuing to use this style labeling as I draft more Provincial Roads.

For what it's worth, I also prefer "Twp Rd" and "Rge Rd" over TR and RR. The "TR274" format has no meaning to me. The "Twp Rd 274" format is also consistent with how it appears on road signs.
Unfortunately, the TR/RR conversion is already a done deal in Alberta; these changes were merged on January 22.
Title: Re: canmbp: Manitoba Provincial Roads
Post by: yakra on August 15, 2018, 12:23:48 am
Devel/Preview ToDo:
NMPs
datacheck except VISIBLE_DISTANCE
list all +X123456X points; attempt to find names (http://forum.travelmapping.net/index.php?topic=2344.msg10520#msg10520)
Did I standardize around cardinal numbers (as I did in AB), ordinal numbers, or use mixed based on local convention? Write program to detect labels. (http://forum.travelmapping.net/index.php?topic=2344.msg10789#msg10789)
Check for MB### labels where no route intersects. QuadTree! Brute Force! (http://forum.travelmapping.net/index.php?topic=2344.msg10799#msg10799)
VISIBLE_DISTANCE: check draft MB MB304 AnnSt coords
425: intersecting routes vs false-positive graph connection
Title: Re: canmbp: Manitoba Provincial Roads
Post by: yakra on August 15, 2018, 05:01:46 pm
Look for labels
for these shaping points at intersections.
Try Google, GMSV, MyTopo, toponymic_layer_utm,
nearby section line roads in graph / HDX.

MB234:  +X8X +X12X
MB269:  +X129800X
MB280:  +x25x +x57x
MB282:  +X606335X
MB283:  +X545324X +X168237X
MB287:  +X614052X
MB304:  +X553449X
MB307:  +X351319X +X780453X
MB312:  +X448823X
MB315:  +X583008X +X984853X
MB330:  +X747794X
MB354:  +X234093X +X797883X
MB365:  +X866364X
MB367:  +X797637X +X988603X +X669686X +X272689X
MB384:  +X255250X
MB391:  +X563282X (Old MB399? Check shapefiles & historic maps. Satellite: Not bloody likely!)
MB404:  +X855912X
MB416:  +X848838X
MB424:  +X917980X
MB453:  +X531602X
MB470:  +X826095X
MB481:  +X852312X
MB482:  +X533239X
MB500:  +X756230X
MB503:  +X562863X
MB513:  +X889904X +X218680X
MB566:  +X269783X +X492361X
MB568:  +X310665X
MB579:  +X928961X +X665299X +X841191X +X478455X +X264049X
MB593:  +X683375X
MB594:  +X136041X +X391505X +X859414X
Title: Re: canmbp: Manitoba Provincial Roads
Post by: oscar on August 16, 2018, 05:27:16 am
SK482's "Municipality of Roblin" segment, SK482Rob, should be relabeled as "Roblin". Roblin Municipality is now an unincorporated community, folded into a larger rural municipality as part of Manitoba's 2015 consolidation of many of its smaller municipalities.
Title: Re: canmbp: Manitoba Provincial Roads
Post by: yakra on August 16, 2018, 03:17:41 pm
Yes, it looks like that larger rural municipality is the Municipality of Hillsburg – Roblin – Shell River (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Municipality_of_Hillsburg_%E2%80%93_Roblin_%E2%80%93_Shell_River).
Backtracking, how did I arrive at that name? Aah yes -- from the MB_Municipal_Boundaries shapefiles, which IIRC came from Manitoba Land Initiative. In these files, LEGAL_NAME = "Municipality of Roblin" (Not actually the full legal name, it would appear (https://web2.gov.mb.ca/laws/regs/current/_pdf-regs.php?reg=124/2014)). The shape of the municipality matches the post-amalgamation boundary shown here (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manitoba_municipal_amalgamations,_2015#/media/File:Manitoba_municipalities_2015.png).
I like to go with the smaller, more speciic/local placenames in Canada, even if they don't match a de jure municipality.
"Shell River" is given as the placename in the NRN shapefiles, so I'm thinking I'll use that, and rename it MB482She, instead.
Title: Re: canmbp: Manitoba Provincial Roads
Post by: oscar on August 21, 2018, 10:49:21 pm
A point request on MB 215: please consider adding a point at Mile 40 Road East, about 2 miles west of MB 44/302 and 4 miles east of MB 12. I traveled to Mile 40 Rd. from the east, then probably turned around there, back when I was county-snagging in the province (though the line I wanted to cross may later have been erased by the province's municipal consolidations).
Title: Re: canmbp: Manitoba Provincial Roads
Post by: yakra on August 22, 2018, 03:10:11 pm
The MB_Municipal_Boundaries shapefiles have the boundary a bit west of James St, as depicted in OSM by the dotted purple line.
It makes more sense to me to have a point at a major junction near the business center, where more traffic would be generated.
Does 1st St work for you? (This would at least allow travelers to clinch something other than 0% or 100%.)
Title: Re: canmbp: Manitoba Provincial Roads
Post by: oscar on August 22, 2018, 11:44:37 pm
The MB_Municipal_Boundaries shapefiles have the boundary a bit west of James St, as depicted in OSM by the dotted purple line.
It makes more sense to me to have a point at a major junction near the business center, where more traffic would be generated.
Does 1st St work for you? (This would at least allow travelers to clinch something other than 0% or 100%.)

Yes.
Title: Re: canmbp: Manitoba Provincial Roads
Post by: yakra on August 27, 2018, 03:17:20 pm
Does 1st St work for you?
Yes.

This made me ask,
Did I standardize around cardinal numbers (as I did in AB), ordinal numbers, or use mixed based on local convention? Write program to detect labels.
Across all systems in MB, I found 36 ordinal labels, and 5 cardinal:
mb.mb006      513Rd   L_STNAME_C = "513 Road"
mb.mb275      1Ave    First Ave NW (https://www.google.com/maps/@52.1103971,-101.277441,3a,18.6y,318.58h,90.68t/data=!3m10!1e1!3m8!1sA7TqHsVFr_sBdW0TKwN2OQ!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo1.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DA7TqHsVFr_sBdW0TKwN2OQ%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D11.261108%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i13312!8i6656!9m2!1b1!2i41)
mb.mb280      1St     L_STNAME_C = "1 Street East"; no GMSV
mb.mb344waw   4St     GMSV: no signs at 4thSt itself; other streets in town signed with ordinal numbers
mb.mb513      1St     First (https://www.google.com/maps/@51.7695286,-98.6356315,3a,15y,34.42h,78.21t/data=!3m10!1e1!3m8!1sMUuPIOLH_9_MOcJy-sffBQ!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo2.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DMUuPIOLH_9_MOcJy-sffBQ%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D114.48782%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i13312!8i6656!9m2!1b1!2i41) St (https://www.google.com/maps/@51.76957,-98.6328197,3a,40.5y,333.79h,66.61t/data=!3m10!1e1!3m8!1sfDmAZ21H4ta0lrNds6y2xQ!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo0.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DfDmAZ21H4ta0lrNds6y2xQ%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D237.8002%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i13312!8i6656!9m2!1b1!2i41)

I'll give these a closer look to make sure they're appropriate.

OK. I'm going to standardize on ordinal numbers in MB for streets and avenues (MB MB6 513Rd stays as is).
These points will be relabeled, and MB MB215 1stSt will be added.
https://github.com/TravelMapping/HighwayData/pull/2162
Title: Re: canmbp: Manitoba Provincial Roads
Post by: yakra on August 27, 2018, 08:57:25 pm
Non-junctions

MB287: MB10 resynced

Incorrect labels; no intersecting route:
mb.mb255: MB252 -> 159W
mb.mb305: MB336 -> 11W
mb.mb364: MB585 -> 93W
Cases on multiplexes will not be detected. Try a graph-based approach. -> Logging all points with fewer than 3 incident edges. The only additional results were false positives at MB6/MB391.
Title: Re: canmbp: Manitoba Provincial Roads
Post by: michih on September 13, 2019, 01:00:05 pm
I have some questions before starting the peer-review:

I already asked what's the story behind wp labels  like "1N" @ MB200 when reviewing canmb (http://forum.travelmapping.net/index.php?topic=9.msg4883#msg4883).

In this case, 1N is not visible on GSV, GM, OSM nor https://www.gov.mb.ca/mit/map/
What's your source?

1N http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=49.015449&lon=-97.158952


I usually check the position of the wps. Just whether it "looks fine" on OSM (with maximum zoom minus 2 steps). However, when I check "off" wps with "HERE Hybrid Day" tile, the wp position often looks more accurate than the OSM position, e.g.:
MB200/MB311 http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=49.605944&lon=-97.129236

Have you drafted the routes based on GM back then? Should I report this kind of "off" wps so that they look fine on OSM or should I ignore these minor issues? I thought that I might check it with max zoom level minus 3 but the MB200/MB311 wp still would look off.
Title: Re: canmbp: Manitoba Provincial Roads
Post by: yakra on September 13, 2019, 02:44:33 pm
I already asked what's the story behind wp labels  like "1N" @ MB200 when reviewing canmb (http://forum.travelmapping.net/index.php?topic=9.msg4883#msg4883).

In this case, 1N is not visible on GSV, GM, OSM nor https://www.gov.mb.ca/mit/map/
What's your source?

1N http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=49.015449&lon=-97.158952
These cases, I assume to be implied by their place in the grid.

I usually check the position of the wps. Just whether it "looks fine" on OSM (with maximum zoom minus 2 steps). However, when I check "off" wps with "HERE Hybrid Day" tile, the wp position often looks more accurate than the OSM position, e.g.:
MB200/MB311 http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=49.605944&lon=-97.129236

Have you drafted the routes based on GM back then?
Coords are ripped from shapefiles using gisplunge (https://github.com/yakra/tmtools/tree/master/gisplunge), where we have single carriageways. With dual carriageways, coords are from either OSM or QGIS.
This example looks OK in Esri WorldImagery FWIW.

Should I report this kind of "off" wps so that they look fine on OSM or should I ignore these minor issues?
It's up to you. It's possible that something could still be significantly off & in need of attention.
I guess, if it's off in both OSM and WorldImagery...
Title: Re: canmbp: Manitoba Provincial Roads
Post by: michih on October 21, 2019, 02:22:30 pm
Ok,  let's start the peer-review feedback with a general question:
I found SK/MB labels at canmbp routes. In Europe, we always use the country name: USA/CAN. I've checked some MB border labels to USA and also found:
USA/CAN @ US59, MN89, MN310, MN313
ND/Can @ US81, I-29, US83
Don't we have a standard here? Especially Can instead of CAN is quite odd.
Was this discussed before? Any consens?


Comments to routes:

MB201:
59E -> MainSt


MB203:
62E is off
MB12 -> MB12_W

MB205:
FroRd -> FroRd_N (concurrent MB216 too)


MB206:
New wp @ http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=50.009661&lon=-96.842361


MB207:
Mun32E -> 32E


MB210:
MB52/302 -> MB52 because it's tier 4 and MB302 just tier 5 (I wasn't aware that there are two MB system when I've reviewed the Winnipeg system)
WelRd is off


MB212:
FerRd -> FerRd_N -> FryRd_N ?


MB215:
MB44/302 -> MB44


MB216:
FroRd -> FroRd_M, see MB205
MB311 is off
MB205_E -> MB205_W
MB205_W -> MB205_E


MB222:
MB9/231 -> MB9
122N -> ArnRd or ColRd


MB224:
MB325 is off
3W is off
*1W -> 1W ?
Jac is MB412 on OSM, was the route downgraded (fine) or recently upgraded (to be added)?
FisRiv_N is off
MB325 -> MB17


MB229:
18W off ?
12W is off


MB231:
MB9/222 -> MB9
New wp for Gimli Industrial Park Airport ?


MB233:
MerRd is off
140N is off


MB234:
New wp for Pine Dock Airport ?
MB8 is off
+X10 is off
BeaPt is off
IslFry: Are you sure about the end point? OSM, GM and aerials show another ferry to the west


MB237:
OSM has a different routing. GSV from October 2018 (https://www.google.com/maps/@51.302997,-98.4331301,3a,15y,262.21h,89.9t/data=!3m10!1e1!3m8!1sn4gjxh70d3Fv-rJuQnvm3w!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo3.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3Dn4gjxh70d3Fv-rJuQnvm3w%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D68.69856%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i13312!8i6656!9m2!1b1!2i36) confirms it. The southern route is just on 2009 GSV (https://www.google.com/maps/@51.2882237,-98.4240184,3a,75y,256.13h,98.08t/data=!3m9!1e1!3m7!1sz0_-2yS9oCIK1MUxAVSa0w!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!9m2!1b1!2i36).


MB238:
Exceeds limits at west end


MB242:
Might get a "(Main)" in city column ? Well, that's how we do it in Europe when there are more than one route (MB291, MB344, MB373, MB482, MB493 too).


MB243:
BorSt -> BorSt_N


MB250:
62N -> SprVlyRd ? When both kind of names are signed, which one do you prefer?
64N -> MayRd ?
MB259 is off
94N and 116W are not signed and not indicated on OSM, GM, Esri nor Here. What's your source and do you wanna keep the wps as-is?
94N is only necessary to avoid a VD error but that's not relevant for active systems.
I've not checked routes MB200-MB248 for this issue but I could check it again when I know how you wanna deal with it.


MB251:
MB256 is off
153W is not signed at all. Source? OSM has it as MB458 (Thunderforest and Stamen too)
148W is only signed Mountain View Rd. Nothing on any map.


I'll continue the review when I know how to deal with the issues.
Title: Re: canmbp: Manitoba Provincial Roads
Post by: michih on October 21, 2019, 02:28:26 pm
I found SK/MB labels at canmbp routes.

Oh boy! SK is Canada. The MB242 wp label at the border to ND is definitely wrong :)
Title: Re: canmbp: Manitoba Provincial Roads
Post by: Bickendan on October 23, 2019, 04:07:28 am
 SK/MB labels are correct.
ND/Can labels should either be ND/MB or USA/CAN; that could have been my screwup back when I drafted the major routes for Can Select Routes.
Title: Re: canmbp: Manitoba Provincial Roads
Post by: yakra on October 24, 2019, 04:42:36 pm
Ok,  let's start the peer-review feedback with a general question:
I found SK/MB labels at canmbp routes. In Europe, we always use the country name: USA/CAN. I've checked some MB border labels to USA and also found:
USA/CAN @ US59, MN89, MN310, MN313
ND/Can @ US81, I-29, US83
Don't we have a standard here? Especially Can instead of CAN is quite odd.
Was this discussed before? Any consens?
ND/Can (Yes, "Can", not all-caps) was the original style used on CHM back in the dark ages when we first started drafting United States Numbered Highways. It was later deprecated/superseded. There will still be a lot of these labels around the USA, on usaus especially.
By the time we'd got the first state/provincial systems going, we'd migrated to more of a "MT/MB" style.
The manual says "As an exception, these subdivision border labels can also be used on the USA/CAN and USA/MEX borders instead of using the countries in the label." As an exception. Allowable, but not the preferred first choice.
IIRC @oscar convinced me to switch to MEX/USA (http://travelmapping.net/hb/?units=miles&u=yakra&r=tx.tx004&lat=25.898703&lon=-97.497480&zoom=17) when drafting usatx.
I agree that USA/CAN style makes the most sense, with country boundaries tr--used to be a perfectly fine verb. Faust came to Portland in July 2018. Told us to get a new president. overriding subdivision boundaries.
Makes sense to re-examine these in (https://github.com/yakra/HighwayData/commit/ed75c1956d8c0adf9303903b38c673c4ee3ff67e) all (https://github.com/yakra/HighwayData/commit/6b9c1d5e855a71ff68ffc0393788593de131ec25) my (https://github.com/yakra/HighwayData/commit/e2d1ce84c0520ceadc81381faa55c0f18208d1db) regions (https://github.com/yakra/HighwayData/commit/e273eb1a9994c50c8783463d51614ba8aa7e8209). I'll have to make a shell script to grep (http://forum.travelmapping.net/index.php?topic=3245) for them.

Comments to routes:
I haven't looked over the comments in detail yet. Spent almost 6 days away from the forum!

Oh boy! SK is Canada. The MB242 wp label at the border to ND is definitely wrong :)
:o Will submit with the other similar changes. Most likely will use USA/CAN. (https://github.com/TravelMapping/HighwayData/pull/3259)

ND/Can labels should either be ND/MB or USA/CAN; that could have been my screwup back when I drafted the major routes for Can Select Routes.
Not your bad. Whoever first drafted ND was following what was at the time standard practice.
While MB/cansph did originally have a 50/50 mix of ND/MB & USA/MB labels, I'd standardized on ND/MB by the time canmb was ready to go.
There are no canmb/canmbp concurrencies at the US border, so none of those points would affect this system.
Title: Re: canmbp: Manitoba Provincial Roads
Post by: yakra on October 28, 2019, 01:44:35 pm
MB201: 59E -> MainSt
MB215: MB44/302 -> MB44
Changed.

MB203:
62E is off
MB12 -> MB12_W
62E is at the main road's intersection as stored in the shapefiles.
MB12 is sufficient to disambiguate from MB12/89.

MB205: FroRd -> FroRd_N (concurrent MB216 too)
Froese Rd appears to be the name north (https://www.google.com/maps/@49.4067192,-96.8491699,3a,15y,316.99h,91.05t/data=!3m9!1e1!3m7!1sxBe2TCWEpVjYHm2-0cq_FA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!9m2!1b1!2i40) but not south (https://www.google.com/maps/@49.4066187,-96.8493448,3a,15y,212.33h,102t/data=!3m10!1e1!3m8!1s1ybNKCcmnwZhuuncJcwRKg!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo1.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3D1ybNKCcmnwZhuuncJcwRKg%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D42.167458%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i13312!8i6656!9m2!1b1!2i40) of (https://www.google.com/maps/@49.40553,-96.8492203,3a,15y,226.29h,86.64t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sUF7vbvqi8s-RGHRw-kpyIg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) that point. I've found that it's pretty common in MB, AB & TX for an otherwise "continuing" local road name to not be the official name on the numbered highway portion, notwithstanding what OSM says. Leaving as-is.

MB206: New wp @ http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=50.009661&lon=-96.842361
Added FesDr at coords from shapefiles.

MB207: Mun32E -> 32E
Heh. I remember this one. For some reason I thought it wasn't named as part of the grid. It is. Changed, along with TCH 1.

MB210: MB52/302 -> MB52 because it's tier 4 and MB302 just tier 5 (I wasn't aware that there are two MB system when I've reviewed the Winnipeg system)
I'm not always consistent on this. :) Chose this one to clarify the multiplex split, complementing the adjacent MB302_N.

WelRd is off
That's the only jct we have shown in the shapefiles. Matches HERE.

MB212: FerRd -> FerRd_N -> FryRd_N ?
MB243: BorSt -> BorSt_N
Signed as such in these cases. Changed.

MB216: ...
MB311 is off
MB205_E -> MB205_W
MB205_W -> MB205_E
MB311 matches shapefiles, ESRI & HERE.
MB205 labels swapped.

MB222:
MB9/231 -> MB9
122N -> ArnRd or ColRd
MB9 label changed.
122N is still cosigned, though. (https://www.google.com/maps/@50.8021414,-96.9951175,3a,17.5y,1.67h,84.79t/data=!3m10!1e1!3m8!1sEHohfA39chLwSeRsyOFdDA!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo0.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DEHohfA39chLwSeRsyOFdDA%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D167.5786%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i13312!8i6656!9m2!1b1!2i40) I like the cleanliness of this option, along with the other labels in this route.

MB224:
MB325 is off
3W is off
*1W -> 1W ?
Jac is MB412 on OSM, was the route downgraded (fine) or recently upgraded (to be added)?
FisRiv_N is off
MB325 -> MB17
Shapefiles do look a bit goofy at MB325, 3W & FisRiv_N. Changed.
MB325 -> MB17
*1W (https://www.google.com/maps/@51.4017007,-97.4856469,3a,37y,339.32h,87.88t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sMYZdU4KIuGPtSq8AVQ3jsw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656), MB412 (http://forum.travelmapping.net/index.php?topic=2344.msg8758#msg8758)

MB229: 18W off ? 12W is off
18W matches ESRI WorldImagery. At 12W, the geometry has changed.

MB231:
MB9/222 -> MB9
New wp for Gimli Industrial Park Airport ?
MB9/222 -> MB9
Gimli Industrial Park Airport was decommissioned as an RCAF base some decades back. Civilian airport now, yes, though it doesn't seem to serve (m)any commuter flights. Interesting history (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gimli_Glider) behind it (with a museum... downtown, east of MB9), but meh. If someone requests it specifically.

MB233:
MerRd is off
140N is off


MB234:
New wp for Pine Dock Airport ?
MB8 is off
+X10 is off
BeaPt is off
IslFry: Are you sure about the end point? OSM, GM and aerials show another ferry to the west
Moved MB8 (in both files), +X10 & BeaPt, since OSM lines up with ESRI WorldImagery.
Not bothering with the airport.
Both shapefile flavors and https://www.gov.mb.ca/mit/map/pdf/map5.pdf show the road to the SW as not part of 234. FWIW Google shows "Summer ferry to Matheson Island".

MB237: OSM has a different routing. GSV from October 2018 (https://www.google.com/maps/@51.302997,-98.4331301,3a,15y,262.21h,89.9t/data=!3m10!1e1!3m8!1sn4gjxh70d3Fv-rJuQnvm3w!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo3.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3Dn4gjxh70d3Fv-rJuQnvm3w%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D68.69856%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i13312!8i6656!9m2!1b1!2i36) confirms it. The southern route is just on 2009 GSV (https://www.google.com/maps/@51.2882237,-98.4240184,3a,75y,256.13h,98.08t/data=!3m9!1e1!3m7!1sz0_-2yS9oCIK1MUxAVSa0w!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!9m2!1b1!2i36).
Oct 2018 GMSV confirms what's in the HB you mean, right? All other signage I can find confirms the HB too. The sign in the 2009 link, I can make out in the background of the 2018 imagery if I back up to MB6.
Worth noting that the two shapefile flavors (http://forum.travelmapping.net/index.php?topic=2344.msg8754#msg8754) differ here, with OSM agreeing with Geobase NRN, and LRN agreeing with field signage. This is pretty common throughout the province, with LRN generally being more accurate. OSM can in places be pretty wildly out of date, often showing old extensions of now-truncated routes. MB248 (http://travelmapping.net/hb/?r=mb.mb248&lat=49.417562&lon=-97.841320&zoom=12) is a prime example. (I'd thought about fixing up all this stuff in OSM after finishing the system...)
Please keep comments like this coming, though. Better to check over something and find it needs no action than to miss something altogether.

MB238: Exceeds limits at west end
Fixed.

MB242: Might get a "(Main)" in city column ? Well, that's how we do it in Europe when there are more than one route (MB291, MB344, MB373, MB482, MB493 too).
Allowed but not required for chopped routes CSVs. I'm not much of a fan of including (Main) city names, especially when there are only 2 pieces of a same-numbered route.
OTOH, rereading the manual (http://travelmapping.net/devel/manual/syshwylist.php), it looks like the Name field is required for connected routes CSVs. Hm. Interesting. If that's the case, I may need to review my systems. Query the DB, write a temporary addition to siteupdate, mumble mumble...?

MB250:
62N -> SprVlyRd ? When both kind of names are signed, which one do you prefer?
64N -> MayRd ?
It'll usually be the 62N style when both are signed. It's possible my opinion could be different based on what else is going on label-wise nearby, but not likely. Probably not worth reporting these cases.

MB259 is off
Moved in both files.

94N and 116W are not signed and not indicated on OSM, GM, Esri nor Here. What's your source and do you wanna keep the wps as-is?
These cases, I assume to be implied by their place in the grid.

94N is only necessary to avoid a VD error but that's not relevant for active systems.
I won't remove it, though. The idea of having the datacheck is to find and eliminate these segments as we're best able. Removing a point because the error will no longer be reported once the system is active rather defeats the purpose of the datacheck.

MB251: MB256 is off
Moved in both files.

153W is not signed at all. Source?
Another place-in-the-grid-case.

OSM has it as MB458 (Thunderforest and Stamen too)
Notably, "458" and not "PR 458" as per OSM SOP. Interestingly, the NRN shapefiles list both L_STNAME_C & R_STNAME_C as "458 Highway", though MB458 (http://travelmapping.net/hb/?r=mb.mb458) itself is elsewhere. This may be a vestigial trace of an old decommissioned route. I'll have to check out Historical Highway Maps of Manitoba (https://www.gov.mb.ca/mit/maparchive/index.html) and see what I can see.

148W is only signed Mountain View Rd. Nothing on any map.
Changed.

Note to self: A lot of color-coded items upthread either still need to be addressed, or were never coded as such.
Title: Re: canmbp: Manitoba Provincial Roads
Post by: michih on October 28, 2019, 03:20:40 pm
Thanks, so I'll continue the review tomorrow.

I think I should report everything as I did except of cases like "MB12 -> MB12_W" and "MB52/302" (tier 4/5 mix)?

I've reported points being off when they were not accurate compared to OSM and HERE Hybrid Day. I'll check OSM and Esri WorldImagery now.
Rather signed place-in-the-grid labels than other signed road names.
Title: Re: canmbp: Manitoba Provincial Roads
Post by: michih on October 29, 2019, 10:24:09 am
MB254:
MB1_W is off
OSM indicates that the route extends at north end concurrent to MB259 and even farther north, OSM error?


MB255:
MB256_S is off
MB85 -> MB83


MB256:
3N_W is off
MB3_E is off
OSM does not indicate it being numbered b/n MB445 and MB345, and again from 85N to MB41 (just for the records, I guess that we just see typical OSM errors)


MB261:
East of MB50 is missing on OSM


MB264:
Different route on OSM b/n MB355 and 90N_E


MB265:
Extends at east end on OSM


MB268:
149W is correct but incorrect on OSM (150W)


MB269:
New wp @ http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=51.536589&lon=-100.393184 to match MB10A's wp MainSt
+X129800X looks like you wanna replace it with a visible wp, nothing on GSV though
MB276 is off


MB274:
I'd rename MB5 to MB5_W
I'd rename MB10 to MB10_N



MB276:
156N_W is road 585 on OSM


MB279:
224N is between the junctions. Is this intended?


MB280:
Does +x95008-8 have a meaning?


MB282:
LaJRd -> LaJamRd ?
+X545324X looks like you wanna replace it with a visible wp, nothing on GSV though
+X168237X looks like you wanna replace it with a visible wp, there is a sign on GSV but I cannot read it
MB10/285 -> MB10 ?


MB285:
MB10/283 -> MB10 ?
KryRd_W -> LapRd_N ? because there is already a LapRd_S label and I prefer using the same


MB291:
MB10 is off
Title: Re: canmbp: Manitoba Provincial Roads
Post by: michih on October 30, 2019, 08:21:03 am
MB302:
MB52/210 -> MB52 ?
MB44/215 -> MB44 ?


MB304:
OHa for O'Hanly is fine but I only found direction signs indicating "Little Black River"
Is RiceRivRd off? OSM and WorldImagery have a junction to the west which is not visible on 2009 GSV
OueLake -> OueLakeRd
Do we need AnnSt wp?
+X114258 is off
+X303293 is off
MB12 -> MB12/59


MB305:
15W is 248 on OSM
11W is 336 on OSM and GM


MB321:
OSM has a different route b/n 7E_S and MB7_S; 2014, 2016 and October 2018 GSV confirm TM route


MB323:
Extends at west end on OSM, 2009-2018 GSV confirm its end at MB6 though


MB325:
16W is off


MB326:
Ends at 329 on OSM, 2012 GSV confirms TM's end (all OSM issues below are also NOT confirmed by the last available GSV)


MB330:
MolRd is signed Road 37 (https://www.google.com/maps/@49.5470556,-97.3676315,3a,15y,222.9h,88.2t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s4hAf1giY7LIqS8mscJ3JTg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)
wps are a little bit off compared to Esri WorldImagery and OSM but I think too less to change it


MB334:
MB241_E -> MB241 (241 extends at west end on OSM though)


MB336:
Extends on OSM and GM at north end, which is wrong according to 2012 GSV (https://www.google.com/maps/@49.5026549,-97.7080812,3a,15y,85t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1skaDV4gPqCWsN6aFuQDqNWw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656), see MB305


MB340:
TreRd is 451 Highway on OSM and GM
TreRd is signed but there is also a 43N sign (https://www.google.com/maps/@49.6356649,-99.6659533,3a,15y,233.46h,86.92t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sOUAcijgQvvdRRIjw_IjldQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)
HorRd is not signed, only Magazine Road and .... 54N ? (https://www.google.com/maps/@49.7970835,-99.6493434,3a,15y,201.67h,88.46t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sOyM6gmV8KosE37fu2wXGWA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)
ShiRd is off


MB341:
106W_N is road 346 on OSM and GM (not confirmed by GSV)


MB343:
Extends at west end on OSM (not confirmed by GSV)


MB344 / MB344waw:
Is the bridge (still) closed?


MB347:
Extends at east end on OSM (not confirmed by GSV)


MB348:
Extends at south end on OSM (not confirmed by GSV)


MB349:
Extends at west end on OSM (not confirmed by GSV)
Title: Re: canmbp: Manitoba Provincial Roads
Post by: michih on October 31, 2019, 02:48:08 pm
MB350:
OSM has a branch east of 54N at Lavenham which must be wrong. However, this road might get a wp ?


MB351:
CampHugRd is also RD 91 W
DaneDr is also RD 90 W


MB352:
LanAve is only signed 87 N


MB353:
CorRd is also signed RD 98 W


MB354:
Extends at south end on OSM and GM but 2014 GSV shows a ENDS sign
OSM indicates it not being concurrent to MB16 but 2018 GSV confirms that we are right
End -> 130 W ?
80N is road 469 on OSM


MB359:
Extends at east end on OSM, GSV is incomplete. No evidence for end (but surely by your official source)
MB16 -> MB16/83


MB360:
82W is also road 360 on OSM


MB361:
Extends at west end on OSM, no ENDS sign but a EAST sign. GSV ends here.
No junction at BellLakePP according to OSM and September 2019 GSB (Google Snow Bike). It's also not a wp in use.


MB366:
MB485 is off


MB367:
IceCreRd -> IceCrkRd ?
SL10-44 is off


MB373:
I'd move NorHouFry to the end of the landing stage, see ferry location for MB373nor


MB373nor:
*OldMB373_D is off
*OldMB373_I is off
PauRd is off


MB374:
*OldMB374_A is off
*OldMB374_E is off
*OldMB374_E -> OldMB374_E ?


MB375:
Extends at east end on OSM and GM, no GSV available


MB384:
+X799771 is off
+X929289 is off
+X473527 is off
+X208110 is off
+X124263 is off


MB391:
Life is a highway :)


MB392:
+X963257 is off
AndBay is off
+X351645 is off


MB395:
SK/MB is off
Some hidden wps are off
MB398 is off


MB395:
Extends at west end on OSM and GM, no GSV available


MB399:
Extends at east end to the north on OSM, no GSV available
Extends at east end to the south on GM, no GSV available
Title: Re: canmbp: Manitoba Provincial Roads
Post by: michih on November 01, 2019, 07:49:44 am
MB406:
MB44 -> MB11/44 (MB408 is correct on this)


MB411:
MB6 is off
OSM indicates other route numbering (partially)


MB416:
OSM has a different route


MB423:
MB3 -> MB3/34


MB425:
has no connection to MB101
New wp for Race Track Road?


MB432:
WilRd is only signed Road 12 N


MB433:
FisGro is South Maple Dr (OSM + 2018 GSV)


MB443:
Wp for Ninga ?


MB445:
Extends at west end on OSM but 2009 GSV shows the ENDS sign
MB3 -> MB3/83
Title: Re: canmbp: Manitoba Provincial Roads
Post by: michih on November 01, 2019, 10:10:35 am
MB450:
End position lacks the ENDS sign. I couldn't find any sign except of a NORTH sign in the opposite direction about half a mile to the east/north
New wp @ http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=49.014195&lon=-100.343164 because it also leads to the END wp


MB452:
New wp @ http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=49.318765&lon=-100.850056
DufAve -> 150W or 22N


MB458:
Extends at north end on OSM but 2018 GSV shows the ENDS sign at our end point


MB459:
MarRd -> 114W


MB464:
67N_E is off


MB468:
67N is indicated being road 561 on OSM


MB469:
Extends at east end on OSM but 2014 GSV shows the ENDS sign at our end point


MB475:
MB16 -> MB16/83


MB478:
171W is off, other non-MB wpts also a little bit


MB480:
84W is off
Route is different on WorldImagery at Guy


MB482:
137N is off


MB491:
DriRiv is off


MB493:
Is missing on OSM


MB493sil:
AirRd is off
Title: Re: canmbp: Manitoba Provincial Roads
Post by: michih on November 01, 2019, 11:00:12 am
MB500:
MB12_S -> MB12/59


MB501:
Extends from 45E to the east on OSM and GM, but we have it to the north. No GSV available.


MB513:
+X358971 is off, new alignment?
+X981388 is off


MB530:
Extends at north end on OSM and GM by accident, 2014 GSV shows ENDS


MB575:
Extends at west end on OSM, no GSV


MB584:
163W_N is off
Title: Re: canmbp: Manitoba Provincial Roads
Post by: yakra on November 07, 2019, 04:02:19 pm
I think I should report everything as I did except of cases like "MB12 -> MB12_W" and "MB52/302" (tier 4/5 mix)?
All of the latter:
MB/canmbp/mb.mb210.wpt: MB52/302 http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=49.517504&lon=-96.510521
MB/canmbp/mb.mb215.wpt: MB44/302 http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=50.061679&lon=-96.498092
MB/canmbp/mb.mb222.wpt: MB9/231 http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=50.640116&lon=-96.994943
MB/canmbp/mb.mb231.wpt: MB9/222 http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=50.640116&lon=-96.994943
MB/canmbp/mb.mb283.wpt: MB10/285 http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=53.823322&lon=-101.252648
MB/canmbp/mb.mb285.wpt: MB10/283 http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=53.823322&lon=-101.252648
MB/canmbp/mb.mb302.wpt: MB52/210 http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=49.517504&lon=-96.510521
MB/canmbp/mb.mb302.wpt: MB44/215 http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=50.061679&lon=-96.498092
MB/canmbw/mb.rt042.wpt: MB75/100 http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=49.777055&lon=-97.156611
MB/canmbw/mb.rt052.wpt: MB9/101 http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=49.972122&lon=-97.073833
MB/canmbw/mb.rt090.wpt: MB7/101 http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=49.989898&lon=-97.229020
MB/canmbw/mb.rt115.wpt: MB15/101 http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=49.886108&lon=-96.958879
MB/canmbw/mb.rt135.wpt: MB1/150 http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=49.855334&lon=-97.103906
MB/canmbw/mb.rt150.wpt: MB1/135 http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=49.855334&lon=-97.103906
MB/canmbw/mb.rt155.wpt: MB3/100 http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=49.775347&lon=-97.318590
MB/canmbw/mb.rt180.wpt: MB8/101 http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=49.986739&lon=-97.106652


In case I were to go the other way with it... Saving some code I temporarily added to siteupdate.cpp, between
#include "functions/concurrency_detection.cpp"
and
// Create hash table for faster lookup of routes by list file name

ofstream mbplog("canmbp.log");
for (HighwaySystem *h : highway_systems)
  if (h->systemname == "canmbp")
    for (Route &r : h->route_list)
      for (Waypoint *w : r.point_list)
      {   if (strchr(w->label.data(), '/')) continue;
   if (w->colocated && w->colocated->size() >= 3)
   {   size_t mb = 0;
      size_t mbp = 0;
      for (Waypoint *p : *w->colocated)
        if (p != w)
          if       (p->route->system->systemname == "canmbp")   mbp++;
          else if  (p->route->system->systemname == "canmb")   mb++;
      if (mb && mbp) mbplog << r.root << ' ' << w->label << '\n';
   }
      }
mbplog.close();
return 0;

The only real examples to change would be
MB224: MB325 -> MB17/325
MB304: MB12 -> MB12/59
MB416: MB17 -> MB17/229
Title: Re: canmbp: Manitoba Provincial Roads
Post by: yakra on December 20, 2019, 03:33:19 pm
OSM has it as MB458 (Thunderforest and Stamen too)
Notably, "458" and not "PR 458" as per OSM SOP. Interestingly, the NRN shapefiles list both L_STNAME_C & R_STNAME_C as "458 Highway", though MB458 (http://travelmapping.net/hb/?r=mb.mb458) itself is elsewhere. This may be a vestigial trace of an old decommissioned route. I'll have to check out Historical Highway Maps of Manitoba (https://www.gov.mb.ca/mit/maparchive/index.html) and see what I can see.
http://content.gov.mb.ca/mit/maparchive/high/1990_1991_map.pdf
http://content.gov.mb.ca/mit/maparchive/high/1992_1993_map.pdf
There was once a MB458 there, that appears to be a victim of the 1992 Great Decommissioning.
At the same time, the modern MB458 was created when MB340's alignment through Treesbank and Stockton to Belmont was downloaded.

VISIBLE_DISTANCE: check draft MB MB304 AnnSt coords
Annex St appears to refer to MB304 itself here. No name available for point; deleting.