| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
JaguarV12e
Regular Visitor
Joined: Feb 07, 2005
Posts: 171
Location: Cambridge UK
|
 Posted: Tue Sep 06, 2011 1:25 pm Post subject: French Autoroutes: Cameras variously 130/110/var/... etc |
 |
|
I drive fairly regularly on French Autoroutes, and it seems that there is some variation in the tagging of cameras on 130 kph sections, all 130 kph limits are reduced to 110 kph in wet or otherwise hazardous conditions.
I have seen such cameras tagged as:
* 130
* 120 (!)
* 110
* Var
* Unknown
* 130 and 110 as separate POIs at the same spot (might have been one on each carriageway)
I don't mind submitting corrections, but would like consensus on how they should be tagged.
Personally I would tag them as 130, as the reduction to 110 is implicit (someone could do an icon for 130/110).
_________________
Tomtom Go 1005
Tomtom Go 730T |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Darren
Frequent Visitor
Joined: 11/07/2002 14:36:40
Posts: 23848
Location: Hampshire, UK
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 06, 2011 6:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Agree, they should be recorded at the higher limit. If you submit a correction please just add a note to the first and we'll be aware of the issue. Thanks,
_________________
Darren Griffin |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
MaFt
Pocket GPS Staff
Joined: Aug 31, 2005
Posts: 15144
Location: Bradford, West Yorkshire
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 06, 2011 7:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
the way the submissions process works is that if we get 1 submission at 130kmh and 3 at 110kmh we will set it to 110 as that is the majority. likewise for locations - the actual POI will be placed at an 'average' of the submitted locations.
my guess is that the cameras in question were submitted in good faith but with a misunderstanding of the speed limit on that stretch and, hence, they have ended up with the wrong speeds.
as darren says, can you either submit them on the submissions map ( http://www.pocketgpsworld.com/modules.php?name=Cameras&op=SubmitCamera ) or email me (MaFt AT pocketgpsworld.com) with a list of the camera ID's and I will update them manually if there are a lot. for example GATSO:12345@50 would have the ID of 12345.
thanks
MaFt |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Andy_P
Pocket GPS Moderator
Joined: Jun 04, 2005
Posts: 19991
Location: West and Southwest London
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 06, 2011 10:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| MaFt wrote: | | for example GATSO:12345@50 would have the ID of 12345. |
You got that wrong too....
ID 12345 was a remove request for a 40mph Gatso! 
_________________
"Settling in nicely" ;-) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
RogerTil
Lifetime Member
Joined: Aug 01, 2011
Posts: 42
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 11, 2011 9:53 am Post subject: |
|
|
| MaFt wrote: | the way the submissions process works is that if we get 1 submission at 130kmh and 3 at 110kmh we will set it to 110 as that is the majority. likewise for locations - the actual POI will be placed at an 'average' of the submitted locations.
MaFt |
This is probably the wrong way to do this, but last week I was in France and was warned of 2 cameras in Las Planas tunnel near Nice airport with a limit of 70kph when the actual limit is 90.
I think there have been occasions when the limit is 70 when they were doing roadworks, but mostly it is 90.
I was a bit slow on the way to the airport, but on the way back I captured the GPS coords and have just submitted them.
Please advise the correct way to suggest updates such as these in future.
TIA Roger |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Darren
Frequent Visitor
Joined: 11/07/2002 14:36:40
Posts: 23848
Location: Hampshire, UK
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 11, 2011 10:12 am Post subject: |
|
|
The best method is to submit a correction via the camera reporting page here.
Failing that, an email to cameras[AT]pocketgpsworld.com with the camera IDs and the changes you wish to report.
_________________
Darren Griffin |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
![]() Posted: Today Post subject: Pocket GPS Advertising |
|
|
We see you’re using an ad-blocker. We’re fine with that and won’t stop you visiting the site.
Have you considered making a donation towards website running costs?. Or you could disable your ad-blocker for this site. We think you’ll find our adverts are not overbearing!
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
Forum FAQ
Search
Usergroups
Profile
Log in for private messages
Log in
