You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
At MOTI's request, BC Ferries is going to create new ferry classes this fiscal to distinguish local from express so that routers won't jump from one the other at common docks.
Why would we not change ferries at a dock? What does "support" mean in terms of the geocoder? Just add them to the accepted road classes? Ferries segments don't have addressing anyway, I think we just need to ignore them at some level.
I might not have the new typology right but from what I recall, OnRoute was having trouble routing with the current ferry classes and we would too if BC Ferries didn't add new ferry classes
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
mraross
changed the title
Add support to geocoder and data-prep for new ITN local/express ferry classes
Add support for new ITN local/express ferry classes
Jun 14, 2018
@mraross commented on Fri Mar 03 2017
@cmhodgson commented on Fri Apr 21 2017
Support was already added for FERRY_PASSENGER.
@mraross commented on Fri Apr 21 2017
At MOTI's request, BC Ferries is going to create new ferry classes this fiscal to distinguish local from express so that routers won't jump from one the other at common docks.
@cmhodgson commented on Fri Apr 21 2017
Why would we not change ferries at a dock? What does "support" mean in terms of the geocoder? Just add them to the accepted road classes? Ferries segments don't have addressing anyway, I think we just need to ignore them at some level.
@mraross commented on Fri Apr 21 2017
I might not have the new typology right but from what I recall, OnRoute was having trouble routing with the current ferry classes and we would too if BC Ferries didn't add new ferry classes
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: