Author Topic: Canada and USA state/province/territorial highways master thread  (Read 3673 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline mapcat

  • TM Collaborator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 432
  • Last Login:Yesterday at 09:27:07 pm
Re: Canada and USA state/province/territorial highways master thread
« Reply #45 on: July 25, 2017, 11:02:01 pm »
Well it's not up to me (this is one of rickmastfan67's states) but neither "might as well be state routes for all intents and purposes" nor the presence of signs that are unlike state route signs seems like a convincing argument. Consider how difficult it would be to arrive at a definitive list. We're getting away from systems made up of "select" routes.

Clinched:

Offline voyager105

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 5
  • Last Login:September 10, 2017, 07:40:52 pm
Re: Canada and USA state/province/territorial highways master thread
« Reply #46 on: July 25, 2017, 11:29:46 pm »
That's fine. I thought they seemed important enough to at least possibly included with the state highways system but whatever works the best.

Offline michih

  • TM Collaborator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 811
  • Gender: Male
  • Last Login:Yesterday at 04:10:05 pm
Re: Canada and USA state/province/territorial highways master thread
« Reply #47 on: July 26, 2017, 12:48:06 pm »
We're getting away from systems made up of "select" routes.

As we already have, for instance: http://tm.teresco.org/hb/index.php?sys=cansph

Is there anything special to justify that these routes are in HB?

Offline mapcat

  • TM Collaborator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 432
  • Last Login:Yesterday at 09:27:07 pm
Re: Canada and USA state/province/territorial highways master thread
« Reply #48 on: July 26, 2017, 01:00:24 pm »
We're getting away from systems made up of "select" routes.

As we already have, for instance: http://tm.teresco.org/hb/index.php?sys=cansph

Is there anything special to justify that these routes are in HB?
Pretty sure it began as an idea that started in CHM and never went anywhere. The list included lots of routes in other provinces previously, before sets were introduced in each of them. Saskatchewan is the only one left without its own set.
Clinched:

Offline michih

  • TM Collaborator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 811
  • Gender: Male
  • Last Login:Yesterday at 04:10:05 pm
Re: Canada and USA state/province/territorial highways master thread
« Reply #49 on: July 26, 2017, 01:05:51 pm »
Pretty sure it began as an idea that started in CHM and never went anywhere. The list included lots of routes in other provinces previously, before sets were introduced in each of them. Saskatchewan is the only one left without its own set.

Should we remove the system or extend the idea to other regions?

There are only 7 routes left and the system is in development...

Online oscar

  • TM Collaborator
  • TM Collaborator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 318
  • Last Login:Today at 12:01:56 am
Re: Canada and USA state/province/territorial highways master thread
« Reply #50 on: July 26, 2017, 03:37:58 pm »
Pretty sure it began as an idea that started in CHM and never went anywhere. The list included lots of routes in other provinces previously, before sets were introduced in each of them. Saskatchewan is the only one left without its own set.

Should we remove the system or extend the idea to other regions?

There are only 7 routes left and the system is in development...

The SK routes can be moved into an in-dev cansk system, to preserve the routes in the HB (some of which have received spot updates) for whoever decides to further develop the system. Indeed, could this be done by simply renaming cansph to cansk?

Offline michih

  • TM Collaborator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 811
  • Gender: Male
  • Last Login:Yesterday at 04:10:05 pm
Re: Canada and USA state/province/territorial highways master thread
« Reply #51 on: July 26, 2017, 03:49:06 pm »
The SK routes can be moved into an in-dev cansk system, to preserve the routes in the HB (some of which have received spot updates) for whoever decides to further develop the system. Indeed, could this be done by simply renaming cansph to cansk?

Sure, but you have to rename the csv files including their content, the wpt file folder and systems.csv. I could do it if you are too busy...

Offline yakra

  • TM Collaborator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 935
  • Last Login:Yesterday at 03:21:44 pm
Re: Canada and USA state/province/territorial highways master thread
« Reply #52 on: July 27, 2017, 02:50:22 pm »
As we already have, for instance: http://tm.teresco.org/hb/index.php?sys=cansph

Is there anything special to justify that these routes are in HB?
CHM's original criterion for inclusion in cansph was that these were on the Canadian equivalent of the National Highway System, IIRC. Can't remember where we got that info from, though.
« Last Edit: July 29, 2017, 02:00:17 am by yakra »

Offline michih

  • TM Collaborator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 811
  • Gender: Male
  • Last Login:Yesterday at 04:10:05 pm
Re: Canada and USA state/province/territorial highways master thread
« Reply #53 on: July 27, 2017, 03:15:58 pm »
^^ What does it mean? And what's your idea to do with it?

Offline yakra

  • TM Collaborator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 935
  • Last Login:Yesterday at 03:21:44 pm
Re: Canada and USA state/province/territorial highways master thread
« Reply #54 on: July 29, 2017, 02:02:13 am »
^^ What does it mean? And what's your idea to do with it?
Not sure what exactly you mean, or if this was in reply to my post.
I'm on board with converting cansph over to an in-dev cansk system.

Offline michih

  • TM Collaborator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 811
  • Gender: Male
  • Last Login:Yesterday at 04:10:05 pm
Re: Canada and USA state/province/territorial highways master thread
« Reply #55 on: July 29, 2017, 03:02:49 am »
I'm on board with converting cansph over to an in-dev cansk system.

That's what I wanna know :)

@oscar: Will you do it?

Online oscar

  • TM Collaborator
  • TM Collaborator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 318
  • Last Login:Today at 12:01:56 am
Re: Canada and USA state/province/territorial highways master thread
« Reply #56 on: July 29, 2017, 11:10:18 am »
I'm on board with converting cansph over to an in-dev cansk system.

That's what I wanna know :)

@oscar: Will you do it?

I can take care of it before I fly back to California next week, once I've finished off a bunch of usaca updates in progress.

Offline dave1693

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 13
  • Last Login:September 20, 2017, 04:36:56 am
Re: Canada and USA state/province/territorial highways master thread
« Reply #57 on: September 12, 2017, 11:23:40 pm »
are there plans to add in the 500 series county routes in New Jersey? they use a system that keeps the same number across county lines unlike the 600 and 700 routes which are unique only in their respective county
Maybe in the distant future, but many of us fear opening up a can of worms by including any system designated "county". I'd personally be against it even though I've got mileage on many of them.
I see both sides of the issue, though I'd add quite a bit of mileage were this system to be added. Each county maintains the routes, but NJDOT is nominally responsible for assigning the route numbers. (I say nominally because some NJ counties may disagree with NJDOT how to sign sign routes in the field, and the county puts up the signs.)

As to the can of worms: I think we reached a consensus that Virginia secondary roads would NOT get done even though the state maintains them, thanks to massive duplication of secondary route numbers. (Hypothetically, every county can have a route with the same SR number with no two so-numbered roads ever touching.) That's kind of the inverse of the NJ 500-series issue. Perhaps a more relevant question might be: are the "Winnipeg City Routes" (Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada) (canmbw) actually maintained by the province, or by the city? I don't know, but perhaps someone on the forum does, and the answer could be relevant here.

Offline mapmikey

  • TM Collaborator
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 179
  • Last Login:Yesterday at 08:00:42 pm
    • Co-curator Virginia Highways Project
Re: Canada and USA state/province/territorial highways master thread
« Reply #58 on: September 13, 2017, 07:14:17 am »
For Virginia and South Carolina, the only secondary routes that could be worth doing are ones that are former state highways.  Otherwise it would be 30,000 miles of secondary routes in each state that not many people will ever have an opportunity to drive versus the huge amount of work it would take to get them into TM (although it would give me personally thousands more miles  ;))

Virginia actually has two distinct non-duplicative numbering systems that would be equally obscure for people actually driving them: Frontage roads (technically these are in the primary system) and school bus routes.  I would not think these are worth doing either.

North Carolina could be done with the 10xx routes only (these are "important" secondary routes that are often either former primary routes or routes most likely to be promoted to a primary route), which have anywhere from 1 to several designations per county.
Clinched:
I: 4 12 16 17 20 26 27 30 59 64 66 68 72 73 ew74 77 78 79 82 83 ew84 85 ew86 e88 97 99
US: 4 6N 9W 11E 11W 13 15 19W 21 44 46 48 58 72 92 113 117 123 130 158 163 176 178 192 206 209 211 219 220 221 222 258 264 276 290 311 319 322 340 360 378 401 ew422 501 521 522 601 701
PriSystems: VA, DE

Online oscar

  • TM Collaborator
  • TM Collaborator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 318
  • Last Login:Today at 12:01:56 am
Re: Canada and USA state/province/territorial highways master thread
« Reply #59 on: September 13, 2017, 11:40:35 am »
I'm on board with converting cansph over to an in-dev cansk system.

That's what I wanna know :)

@oscar: Will you do it?

I can take care of it before I fly back to California next week, once I've finished off a bunch of usaca updates in progress.

Actually, it never got done before I resumed my road trip out West. Now I'm back home, recovering from eye surgery. While much of my vision is back, it won't be 100% until late October at the earliest. I don't consider the extermination of cansph a high priority, it can wait.