Travel Mapping

Highway Data Discussion => In-progress Highway Systems & Work => Topic started by: si404 on April 16, 2016, 02:36:18 pm

Title: Asia-Pacific Master Thread (UNESCAP / ESCWA)
Post by: si404 on April 16, 2016, 02:36:18 pm
(work in progress)
Phase 1 (tier 1/2):Phase 2 (international systems):

Phase 3 (national systems - incomplete list):
Title: Re: Asia-Pacific Master Thread
Post by: michih on April 16, 2016, 04:04:59 pm
Algeria is not Asia-Pacific ;)
Sri Lanka is missing.
Title: Re: Asia-Pacific Master Thread (UNESCAP)
Post by: panda80 on July 14, 2017, 07:27:07 am
Thailand? I have some mileage there...
Title: Re: Asia-Pacific Master Thread (UNESCAP)
Post by: si404 on July 14, 2017, 10:46:32 am
Thailand? I have some mileage there...
As do I, but mine is not clinch-able yet (and is unlikely to be this decade). You can preview Asian Highways in Thailand, however, and add any mileage there.
Title: Re: Asia-Pacific Master Thread (UNESCAP / ESCWA)
Post by: michih on January 28, 2018, 05:34:00 am
Are there any national systems ready for peer-review? Which are less painful, e.g. only routes with numbered exits like korex?
Title: Re: Asia-Pacific Master Thread (UNESCAP / ESCWA)
Post by: Duke87 on February 12, 2018, 01:09:16 am
If no one has taken on Australia I could start working on that next (now that Iceland is "done").

It should definitely be split into subregions, though.
Title: Re: Asia-Pacific Master Thread (UNESCAP / ESCWA)
Post by: si404 on February 12, 2018, 05:41:51 am
I believe Bickendan made a start by drafting Highway 1. For that reason, I didn't begin drafting the system to keep me awake* while listening to the Ashes this winter (though I was glad I slept through most of the humilating parts). I plan on working on NZL state highways to keep me awake during the 2-test series in late March.

Sub-regions for Australia are set up already.

One big problem with this system is that they have transitioned to alphanumeric numbering, but Western Australia isn't doing it and Northern Territory is still in transitioning. ACT doesn't generally number its roads. Also status isn't linked to number and the prefixes on the alphanumeric numbering change with status (M, A, B) so routes might be many files just because some parts are freeway, other parts aren't, some parts receive national funding (and are thus 'National Highway'), others don't (but are still part of the national network as 'National Routes'). It's all a bit of a mess.

*when play is through the night UK time.
Title: Re: Asia-Pacific Master Thread (UNESCAP / ESCWA)
Post by: si404 on February 12, 2018, 06:48:58 am
This is the most annoying thing from what I can make out: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Highways_in_Australia#Route_numbering_systems

Basically other than ACT and NSW doing stuff the same, every state and territory does things differently. Some keep special shields for National Highways, others have special shields for each type of route, some have no shields.

Ideally this would be the split, but the other stuff complicates it and this format would have issues in any state:
Motorways (roads with M prefixes) - tier 1
National Highways (roads with A prefixes) - tier 3 (continental system)
National Routes (roads with B prefixes) - tier 4 (national system)
State Routes - tier 5 (subnational system)

However it really doesn't work like that. Most states have National Routes as A roads (occasionally A or B, depending on how they feel) without the special shields (or with different shields) that National Highways have. NSW/ACT doesn't seem to have any distinction between the two systems.
Title: Re: Asia-Pacific Master Thread (UNESCAP / ESCWA)
Post by: michih on February 12, 2018, 01:15:49 pm
If no one has taken on Australia I could start working on that next (now that Iceland is "done").

What's about peer-reviews? We currently have 60(!) systems in preview.

Talking about Asia-Pacific, I thought about reviewing index and jpne next. You could review chng or asiahr et cetera. There are also some systems in USA/CAN (http://tm.teresco.org/forum/index.php?topic=2360.msg8920#msg8920) and Europe left...

And there's already an Australia thread (http://tm.teresco.org/forum/index.php?topic=176).
Title: Re: Asia-Pacific Master Thread (UNESCAP / ESCWA)
Post by: Duke87 on February 12, 2018, 09:09:59 pm
If someone has already claimed it I won't step on their toes - the OP suggested it was unclaimed.

WRT peer review... you have a point, although I hesitate to go reviewing routes in a jurisdiction I have little familiarity with. Let me dig through and see what systems need review that no one has claimed.
Title: Re: Asia-Pacific Master Thread (UNESCAP / ESCWA)
Post by: michih on February 13, 2018, 12:58:48 pm
If someone has already claimed it I won't step on their toes - the OP suggested it was unclaimed.

The OP indicates the official HB status but Bickendan has not yet submitted any file... I think you should ask Bickendan if he still wants to develop the system or if he can upload the files to GitHub and you can go ahead with drafting routes.

btw: I don't claim chng nor asiahr ;)

WRT peer review... you have a point, although I hesitate to go reviewing routes in a jurisdiction I have little familiarity with. Let me dig through and see what systems need review that no one has claimed.

According to what is indicated on the site....

Quote
Some experienced users volunteer to help the project. If this interests you, start by reporting problems with existing highway data. Those who have learned the project's structure and highway data rules and guidelines can help greatly by providing review of new highway systems in development. Highly experienced users can learn how to plot new highway systems under the guidance of experienced contributors.

;)
Title: Re: Asia-Pacific Master Thread (UNESCAP / ESCWA)
Post by: Duke87 on February 13, 2018, 08:56:57 pm
Yes I've read that passage before. Maybe I'm taking this more seriously than others, but I see peer reviewing a system as not merely checking for things like that waypoint labeling follows guidelines or that intersections line up - but also as doing a thorough check that the routes in the HB match what is signed in the field / what is officially correct on paper as applicable.

I wouldn't even know where to begin doing that kind of check on chng since I have never been to China, I can't read Chinese writing, and there is no GMSV in China. I could check that what's drafted matches Google Maps or OSM, but I can't check it against primary sources and therefore cannot vouch for its accuracy. Would prefer someone more familiar with China handle (I recognize we may not have any such person "on staff").

I'm reviewing zafn and comfortable doing that because although I have never been to South Africa either, there is GMSV of all the major roads and the signs are all in English (although for this purpose I'd be fine with any language using the Latin alphabet and could swing Greek or Cyrillic if need be). This is sufficient for me to be reasonably confident that what I am signing off on is an accurate representation of reality on the ground.
Title: Re: Asia-Pacific Master Thread (UNESCAP / ESCWA)
Post by: si404 on February 14, 2018, 07:48:24 am
Would prefer someone more familiar with China handle (I recognize we may not have any such person "on staff").
We don't AFAICS - it's one of many reasons why the system isn't ready for review, even though it's in preview (note that Michael!). I drafted routes to the best of my ability, but I was reliant on finding a latin-alphabet map service for word-based name labels (thankfully most were exit numbers or numbered routes).

That, and the snapshot of routes is about 3 winters out of date, so there's going to be about 10,000km not included...  :P

I've not been keeping Japan up-to-date (there's not much to add there though - more like 100km), and the Philippines had so much conflicting information that I just picked one set and stuck with it - it looks like I will have to revisit that system and redo it now more information is available.

---

zaf's fine for review. Though it will probably be quite a bit of work as I didn't check to see whether road numbers are signed (often just glad to have a point I could label!), and various routes are very long. It was quite a tedious system to create in places.
Title: Re: Asia-Pacific Master Thread (UNESCAP / ESCWA)
Post by: michih on February 14, 2018, 12:47:10 pm
(note that Michael!)

Hard to know when there is no info and no response...................
Title: Re: Asia-Pacific Master Thread (UNESCAP / ESCWA)
Post by: michih on February 14, 2018, 01:13:49 pm
but I can't check it against primary sources

I think our primary source is OSM, isn't it?
Title: Re: Asia-Pacific Master Thread (UNESCAP / ESCWA)
Post by: yakra on February 14, 2018, 03:14:50 pm
I think our primary source is OSM, isn't it?
I think that by "primary sources", Duke87 means sources direct from the government agencies responsible for the highways -- or as close as we can get to that.
OSM itself can be pretty unreliable in places, Manitoba being a notable example.
Title: Re: Asia-Pacific Master Thread (UNESCAP / ESCWA)
Post by: Duke87 on February 14, 2018, 10:12:46 pm
but I can't check it against primary sources

I think our primary source is OSM, isn't it?

I'm using the academic definition of "primary source" here - i.e. the source material for the facts, not a second-hand account of them.

So no, OSM is not a primary source, it is a secondary source. An official DOT map is a primary source since it's published by the agency that maintains the roads. An official route log is also a primary source for the same reason. And while GMSV is technically a secondary source, we trust that their pictures of signs posted in the field (the signs themselves are primary sources) are not altered so as to change what they say.
Title: Re: Asia-Pacific Master Thread (UNESCAP / ESCWA)
Post by: michih on February 15, 2018, 01:40:19 pm
Ok, thanks!