Taco909 wrote:Okay, I'm not sure if this belongs in Validator or if it is a WME bug.
With the week's changes, my first custom highlight is now nul elevation (and when I clear it, it comes back on next reload)
That's fine, I can live with it... but it seems that for the most part, I only see it after I've edited a segment... such as after deleting a connected segment or unneeded junction node.
For the unneeded junction node I would expect the purple highlight to take precedence, but I'm seeing others that were not highlighted before a save and pop up green after saving.
In one case, after a save, a street two segments removed from any editing popped up nul.
At first I thought I still had highlighter set to display recent edits, but confirmed that it was not set.
They are legitimately nul elevation, but I have not yet been able to confirm whether or not they were nul before the edit-save operation.
The only reason you started to see null elevation is that JNF wasn't working properly for a while, and JNF suppresses null elevation (shows 0 instead). So with JNF suppressing null elevation, Validator didn't see it, and couldn't show it.
Taco909 wrote:Please be aware that some apparent overlaps and spurious geonodes were placed intentionally for TTS wayfinding assistance.
It is not uncommon for a junction to have a 90 degree turn, but the geonode is placed so closely that it appears to be a shallower angle. These are intentional to force a "Turn ____" instruction rather than "Stay to the ____"
Likewise, there may be some cases where it is desired to execute the turn instruction early, but to overlay the departing segment onto the feeder segment for a short distance.
Apparent spurious geonodes, yes, but 90° turn-instruction micro-doglegs wouldn't show an "overlap". The overlap highlight only shows when the segments run on top of each other for a moment, so making such a dogleg would remove that highlight, unless of course the segment overlapped the other segment later on.
As for the early instructions, IMO it's better as an editor to lay the departing segment just next to, but not directly
coincident with, the continuing segment.
In short, IMO the overlapping check is still quite useful to detect improperly-set "dogleg" constructions (usually where the geonode was accidentally snapped to the other segment) and to let you know to give the latter scenario just a little bit of leeway.
As far as the highlight, my experience it only checks for two segments connected to the same junction, at the same turn angle
. So am apparently overlapping segment with a dogleg wouldn't get a highlight, provided the dogleg caused the two segments to have different turn angles.
OTOH it's never a good idea to lay two segments directly over each other, as it makes it much harder to detect and edit later. It is unnecessary because the client has a max zoom level of 6, and therefore any segments separated by less than a few meters are visually distinguishable in the client display.
Even in the very trade case where you purposefully want to create two segments which fully overlap, including identical turn angles (understanding the implications this will have to routing instructions - it can completely suppress instructions), you only need the first bit of the segment to overlap, ascertaining you can place a geometry node to shift the rest of the segment over a meter or so, to run adjacent to each other.
Sent using Tapatalk for Android 4.4.2