Template talk:Infobox road/Archive 2

message: Moved to Template:Routeboxint using noinclude and includeonly tags. --Chris 14:22, 13 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Usage

message: Just a suggestion- let's not put any more routeboxes on pages until we get everything straightened out so we don't have to keep changing articles. --Rschen7754 03:11, September 13, 2005 (UTC)
:I agree, mostly. It took me an hour to change those 10 pages yesterday! Have we or have we not reached a consensus with the fields being displayed in the route box? I couldn't think of anything else, so I think it's probably okay. For stuff like "do we want to keep the legend on the template?" and "do we keep the Browse State Hwys section?", we can make those changes fairly easily at any given time because changing the template affects everything else. --Rob 19:12, 13 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I completely agree. Some changes to the template that I am thinking of WILL require all to be changed. --Engleman 01:40, 14 September 2005 (UTC)

text: I seem to remember having a few good ideas, but I went brain-dead when school went into full swing. I'll try and remember... --Chris 00:33, 29 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Don't use this template?

message: Okay... I'd like to make everything in the left columns left-aligned, and keep everything in the right column left-aligned.
The reason I'm posting this here first is to ask... are there any plans to have 3 or more columns in this routebox? --Rob 14:24, 23 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: One other thing... what's everyone's resolutions? I'm gradually realizing I may be developing for my resolution, when not everyone has 1280 x 1024 resolutions. --Rob 00:28, 24 September 2005 (UTC)

text: I use 1024 by 768... but keep in mind that some people may have something terrible like 640 by 480. --Rschen7754 01:50, 24 September 2005 (UTC)

text: Regarding the alignment... just as long as the rowspans aren't screwed up, that works. Like if I used  for example. --Rschen7754 01:53, 24 September 2005 (UTC)

text: Please, don't make it any wider. --Chris 05:24, 24 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Changes for 9/23/05 

message: What's the distinction?
Is it Primary = 2di, Secondary = 3di, or Primary = original Interstate route, Secondary = added Interstate Routes (like Interstate 39, Interstate 43?) --Rob 19:25, 27 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: With the exception of I-238, its all based on the number of digits. (actully I'm not quite sure why we even have that field; isn't it obvious. and in some cases, 3dis are more important than some 2dis (for instance I-678 links I-95 @ the bruckner interchange with JFK, while I-99 does abolutely nothing useful! ok so that was a bit of a joke (I-99 would never have been designated by AAHSTO; perhaps as I-170 or I-776), but some 3dis re more significant than some 2dis); but it doesn't really make any difference to me. --Chris 21:45, 27 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Hmm. If that's the case, I'd just remove the field from the template. It's impossible to determine the importance of a highway based on number of digits alone; you have to read the article. --Rob 14:23, 28 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Perhaps I wasn't being clear enough. While its not just importance, I think they might be officially called that. --Chris 00:29, 29 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: The FHWA log diffrentiates between types of Interstates by the digits (except 238), so that's the classification we use.  --Rschen7754 01:06, 29 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Primary vs. Secondary 

message: OK, I've got a question. I'm thinking about starting work on the Oklahoma version of I-240. If you take a look at a map, you'll see that it might be considered a loop, but then again, it never rejoins with I-40. (It used to, until I-44 was extended in the 1980's.) Also, there is some signage that refers to it as the so-and-so memorial loop. What should I put in the route_type? reg or loop? (I'm leaning toward loop.) Scott5114 18:25, 2 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I'd say reg because there are terminii... the purpose of the loop designation was for routes like... I-495 in DC for example, which has no  terminus. --Rschen7754 19:43, 2 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Reg vs. Loop

message: Can we change Exit # on the template to Exit/Mile #? Some Interstates have wacky exit numbers (Indiana Toll Road) that are sequential. Some Interstates don't have exit numbers (Tri-State Tollway). Some Interstates have neither exit numbers nor mileposts (!) (Interstate 180 (Illinois)). I'm sure some Interstate out there has exit numbers and no mileposts. So I'm not sure what was intended for this column, but Exit # is unclear, possibly unwanted if you meant "Mile #", and occasionally unattainable. --Rob 20:54, 6 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Sequential exit numbers (which aren't considered wacky in the northeast, but the norm) are not a problem, if the each junction is far better known by its exit number than by the nearest milepost. According to the Illinois State Toll Highway Authority, the Tri-State Tollway does have exit numbers. I am still unaware of any Interstate without exit numbers. Therefore, I think its best to describe each junction with its more commonly used number, especially if every interstate has exit numbers. --Chris 23:41, 6 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Cool map... I actually haven't ever seen it before. Unfortunately, they don't put the exit numbers on the signs, which is somewhat crucial. All of the boards on the tollway system look like this. That said, the map is very, very useful for Interstates on the tollway system. Thanks! --Rob 01:21, 7 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Heh that's funny. I don't know what to say. I did find this, which tht map says is the last interchange on the toll road, but I suppose you don't need to go through a toll to get there, but even stranger is that the exit number on the sign isn't 0, which the map says. I guess maybe that it's 160 miles on I-80 from the Iowa border (in other words, they use I-80 numbering there). Also, I think I could be wrong about those being exit numbers. Some stuff is ".5", so perhaps they are just telling the nearest half-milepost. I guess that they probably (at least internally) use those numbers to refer to each interchange. --Chris 02:38, 7 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: That's odd. Yes, that particular interchange belongs wholly to the Illinois Department of Transportation, I believe, which is why they start at mile marker 160 there (Torrence Avenue is, I think, exit 161 or 162). Other oddities? Why, I do believe I see the Northwest Tollway marked backwards (east to west instead of west to east)! --Rob 11:45, 8 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: The New York State Thruway is also like that for the I-90 portion. They went north from New York City, then headed west at Albany. --Chris 12:35, 8 October 2005 (UTC)

text: Hmm... I don't know of any 2dis with no exit numbers. Interstate 705 has no exit numbers but there we could just use mileposts (either 0 or 1 since it's so short). --Rschen7754 (talk - contribs - count) 02:31, 7 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Exit # --> Exit # or Mile 

message: Sorry... I had to change the template to stop people from adding in non-interstate junctions... I finally had to delete them on primary interstates because there simply isn't enough room... but anyway, for the type3 field put INTERSTATE if we are putting only interstate junctions in there, and put MAJOR if we are putting all junctions in there. Thanks! I'll fix the routeboxes over the weekend. --Rschen7754 (talk - contribs) 01:44, 15 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Even for "short" Interstates (Interstate 4, Interstate 17, Interstate 88 (west))? --Rob 01:07, 16 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: There it could be either... I'm just trying to not have people who are unfamiliar with the project putting in non-interstate junctions and making the routeboxes big. For I-8 it really doesn't matter though... --Rschen7754 (talk - contribs) 01:27, 16 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: What is type3?

message: This template has been sent to Wikipedia:Templates for deletion. --Rschen7754 (talk - contribs)  02:38, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: TFD