jm6087 wrote:That is a regional decision to stress on revcons.
Personally I have no issues with it being visible to all and of course that will be up to Bruce in the long run but it is my understanding that as a national guidance, revcons do not have to be fixed.
That said, I do clean them up as I come across them but I never tell any editor that they have created any.

I clean them as I encounter them, and don't bother the editor who created them, either, since I know they probably aren't even aware of them. So we're on the same page there.

The Raid, on the other hand, has the potential to create a sea of revcons across the map. Sure, we can press a button to get rid of screensfull of them, but why not simply clean them as you go and then it's not a big project (which I'm guessing is the rationale for why it's being encouraged in my region (sure, as you say, they're not technically a problem currently, but they also really shouldn't be there if for no other reason than it's cleaner without them)). Since I see it happening in the Discord channel for my region, I figured there was no harm in asking for the feature.

I'm assuming that SkiDoGuy is the "Bruce" that you mention above (I don't know his name). I'll look forward to seeing his thoughts on the matter.

Ok, thanks for the info!

lg1992 wrote: ↑Fri Jun 25, 2021 3:09 am May I ask what's TIO?

 

Turn Instruction Override.
 
 
 
 

Lately, I've started to see this any time I do a page (re)load of the map:

https://i.postimg.cc/rFsM2wjr/Screenshot.png

Figured I should let someone know, in case this hasn't been reported yet.  I've verified that I'm running the current version (1.9.12).
 

linguasaltitante wrote: ↑Thu Sep 16, 2021 10:45 amI'm aware of that 'redo' option, but I was told - when I was just a young  an ignorant editor    - that a 'redo' will make exactly what you mentioned: «Unfortunately the redo function affects all segments in the roundabout not just the one with the extra node.»

By doing this, we are loosing all info / history of the segments (editions, speeds, etc.) and, if possible, we should avoid that. That is why I only delete those leftover nodes and not make 'redo' to try to preserve as much info / history!


 

My understanding of how roundabouts work from a navigation standpoint (and someone please correct me if this is no longer the case or I was just outright understanding it wrong "way back then") is that for navigation to work correctly through a roundabout, the ID numbers through it need to be sequential.  So when you divide a road going into it as in your example, that's already being broken because the segments IDs in the roundabout will no longer be sequential.  The "Redo Roundabout" function does destroy the existing segments, and then it re-draws new segments using the old overall geometry to create a new roundabout in the place of the old one - but now the segment IDs are once again sequential.

So while it is unfortunate to lose history, etc. (traffic flow, etc., will rebuild over time), doing the redo is preferable to not doing it when you've attached "new" roads to a roundabout so that the segment IDs can be re-sequenced.

If I'm just resizing or slightly relocating a roundabout, I'll use that other tool (forgetting the name of it now) because I don't want to lose history unnecessarily, but if adding new connecting segments to a roundabout due to dividing those roads, etc., I'll always do a "redo" afterwords to get things back in sequence.

Again, someone please let me know if sequential segment IDs are no longer important for navigation through a roundabout.  (Or I just have been misunderstanding it since day one.)
 
 

Ok, good to know about the sequential IDs not actually being a thing.  This was years ago, and I'd heard it from someone pretty high-ranked (though being years ago, I don't remember who it was now).  Or maybe read it in a Wiki page at one time?  I really just don't remember the details as to where I got the information.  The fact was impressed on me by what I considered a reliable source, and I would have never come up with the idea of sequential ID numbers being important on my own (I didn't know enough about how things worked at that time to come up with my own theory on the subject).  Perhaps at one time it mattered?

Either way, it's good to know that it's not something which affects navigation presently.
 
 
 

Within the last month the ability to force the Fancy Permalinks to use beta or production links has disappeared.

Horizon911 wrote:Hi, Just wonder about the "Redo RA" behavior. I am trying to update this RA but when I use Redo RA, it cuts also those FreeWay segments. (disregarding their different elevation)
Is that intentional? (Or is that something that wants to be fixed or can be configured?)
Can such behavior be avoided without me touching those FW segments? (They are above my editor level + It's extra opportunity to screw up something I did not want to change. )

I would ask a senior editor to drag them out of the way before trying to redo the RA - add geohandles and just pull it away. When done, remove any geohandles added to have the FWY snap back to where it was. No need to disconnect anything.

Make sure to do at least a soft refresh before removing reverse connections. If the WME thinks they are disconnected, even if it's a bug, the tool will change one way segments to two way.

Enable all new turns on new junction doesn't seem to work. That's with 1.9.7 and no scripts running.

JNF/RevCon doesn't seem to work reliably. Thought it was script related as it worked with scripts off, but 50/50 on scripts didn't affect the function. Error provided in TB Beta channel.