Page 23 of 57

Re: Road Types (USA) – comprehensive overhaul of drivable ro

PostPosted: Thu Aug 25, 2016 3:09 pm
by herrchin
The routing preference unfortunately locks the entire segment to rank 5, last I knew. Not just that attribute, so it's not without drawback.

Re: Road Types (USA) – comprehensive overhaul of drivable ro

PostPosted: Fri Feb 20, 2015 12:24 am
by ialangford
Is that access for the nearby scenic overlook?

Re: Road Types (USA) – comprehensive overhaul of drivable ro

PostPosted: Mon May 12, 2014 4:06 pm
by irowiki
Not sure if this is the sort of example you're looking for, but Interstate 27 in Texas starts on surface streets in Lubbock and ends on surface streets in Amarillo. No ramps involved.

Re: Road Types (USA) – comprehensive overhaul of drivable ro

PostPosted: Mon May 12, 2014 9:25 pm
by irowiki
Why would you use a ramp if a major highway becomes a freeway using the same road surface?

https://www.waze.com/editor/?zoom=5&lat ... 44&env=usa

US-87 becomes I-27 and vice versa. Or are you saying the connecting points between the two should be ramps? How long would the ramps be?

Re: Road Types (USA) – comprehensive overhaul of drivable ro

PostPosted: Tue May 20, 2014 5:33 pm
by irowiki
nnote wrote:I have to give a shout out to my AZ team, after much debating the official state gov FC GIS, on April 30th we decided to go for it. Almost two weeks later of non stop editing, ------- AZ FC is completed! ----------



According to the wiki however, all US highways should be Major Highway, no? There's numerous US highways in AZ that aren't!

Re: Road Types (USA) – comprehensive overhaul of drivable ro

PostPosted: Wed May 28, 2014 4:10 pm
by irowiki
So a US highway should be a major highway regardless of FC?

Re: Road Types (USA) – comprehensive overhaul of drivable ro

PostPosted: Fri Feb 20, 2015 6:22 am
by irowiki
Strange that on street view there's a stop sign pointing roughly north but no road that I can see.

Re: Road Types (USA) – comprehensive overhaul of drivable ro

PostPosted: Tue Feb 24, 2015 2:11 pm
by irowiki
Tx, we're talking about the ones not marked like that.

Re: Road Types (USA) – comprehensive overhaul of drivable ro

PostPosted: Mon Feb 16, 2015 11:58 pm
by jasonh300
sketch wrote:
txemt wrote:
voludu2 wrote:Then the style/best practice for this should also clearly state that any MPs which arise as a result should be closed "not identified", just to be clear that we aren't going to let an MP tell us what to do.


No, don't ever close an MP as "not identified." IGNs get involved then.

This is very old information. IGNs haven't edited segments in years. Not identified is correct for MPs. Think of it as "not a problem".


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


I wouldn't say "years", but I was assured by an admin that the MPs would no longer be handled this way, which confirms (to me) that it was once handled that way. I can't find the emails now, but I believe the end result was that "not identified" now prevents that MP from appearing again.

Re: Road Types (USA) – comprehensive overhaul of drivable ro

PostPosted: Tue Feb 17, 2015 3:23 am
by jasonh300
sketch wrote:
jasonh300 wrote:I wouldn't say "years", but I was assured by an admin that the MPs would no longer be handled this way, which confirms (to me) that it was once handled that way. I can't find the emails now, but I believe the end result was that "not identified" now prevents that MP from appearing again.

I say "years" only because all the "Last edited by ign_*" seem to be from 2012. It may have been a bit less than that. Either way, I am sure I read that "not identified" now prevents the MP from reappearing over a year ago.


Also, the fact that once that happened, we wiped out all the MPs in New Orleans, and now they seldom--if ever--appear.