| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
yakra
Joined: 30 Jul 2008
Posts: 2600
Location: Area Code 207
|
 Posted: Thu Sep 11, 2014 12:13 pm Post subject: OK: MusTpk and CreTpk designated as OK351 and OK364 |
 |
|
http://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=11780
Signage has started appearing in the field.
So this would mean removing MusTpk and CreTpk from the USASF system, and using them as AltRouteNames for OK351 and OK364 in USAOK, yeah?
Edits to submit:
usaok.csv; usaok_con.csv
CreTpk / OK364: MusTpk -> OK351
MusTpk / OK351: CreTpk -> OK364 <relabeling will make a Long Visible Distance error reappear>
US62: +OK165 -> OK165/351
US64: MusTpke -> OK351; CreTpke_E -> OK364_E; +CreTpke_W -> OK364_W
US69: +MusTpke -> OK351
US75: +CreTpk -> OK364
US75AltTul: +CreTpke -> OK364
US169: CreTpke_E -> OK364_E
OK51: +MusTpk_N -> OK351_W; CreTpk -> OK364; MusTpk_S -> OK351_E
OK66: +CreTpk -> OK364
OK165: +MusTpk_S -> OK351_E
Last edited by yakra on Tue Sep 15, 2015 2:35 am; edited 2 times in total |
|
| Back to top |
  |
 |
yakra
Joined: 30 Jul 2008
Posts: 2600
Location: Area Code 207
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 03, 2015 2:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Or on the other hand...
We could leave the routes in USASF. And have them as both OK numbered routes, and OK Turnpikes.
This sets the stage for breaking off the Oklahoma Turnpikes into their own discrete set, and including the whole lot of`em. Even the Chickasaw. Thoughts? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
oscar_voss
Joined: 27 Jul 2008
Posts: 622
Location: Arlington VA
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 03, 2015 3:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| yakra wrote: | Or on the other hand...
We could leave the routes in USASF. And have them as both OK numbered routes, and OK Turnpikes.
This sets the stage for breaking off the Oklahoma Turnpikes into their own discrete set, and including the whole lot of`em. Even the Chickasaw. Thoughts? |
I'm not crazy about a proliferation of small new separate route sets. I'd prefer adding the Muskogee and Creek turnpikes to USAOK, removing them from USASF (why have them in two places?), and either leaving other OK turnpikes in USASF or at some point folding them as named routes (assuming they are, and will remain, unnumbered) into USAOK.
Part of the Chickasaw Turnpike is now a numbered route, reducing the heartburn (minor, like the route itself) of not mapping the rest of it. |
|
| Back to top |
  |
|
mapcat
Joined: 08 Oct 2011
Posts: 150
Location: United States
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 04, 2015 9:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| I agree with Oscar. There may be some value to retain the names for users who join in the future and are unaware of the numbers, however. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
yakra
Joined: 30 Jul 2008
Posts: 2600
Location: Area Code 207
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 04, 2015 10:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
After seeing some of the cans of worms that were starting to open on AARoads, my opinion is swaying this way as well.
Regarding moving named routes to the state sets, I'm not wild about that. I'd prefer to keep the purity of numbered state routes signed with a specific shield type (Vermont notwithstanding  ). |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
yakra
Joined: 30 Jul 2008
Posts: 2600
Location: Area Code 207
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 15, 2015 2:35 am Post subject: |
|
|
Updated on TravelMapping.
Turnpikes deleted; renamed to new numbered routes. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
