In a similar fashion, I have slowly won my other half over to numbering highway exits by distance (e.g., the exit at mile¹ 5 is exit 5; if the next isn't until mile 8, then it's exit 8, and there just aren't exits 6 & 7), vs. sequentially (the exit after exit 5 is exit 6 — usually! — without regards to distance; exit 6 might be 8 miles from exit 5).
The benefit of the mile-marker system is that given an exit, you know roughly how long in both time and space until that exit as a driver. The other system is just chaos, and it usually doesn't end up sequential anyways. They're not renumbering the whole road to add an exit, so you get exits 5A, 5B, 6 anyways.
¹we're in for a world of hurt if we ever get on board with metric…
I still remember when Interstate exits in the US were numbered sequentially. It seems like only 20 years ago they switched to mile markers for exit numbers.
It makes totally sense. Here in Barcelona, an exit goes by one number "Exit 26", it can be 10km, 15km, etc. They tell you the proximity: "Exit 26B 1000m", "Exit 26B 500m" and the last warning the cartels are white "Exit 26B 250m".
The benefit of the mile-marker system is that given an exit, you know roughly how long in both time and space until that exit as a driver. The other system is just chaos, and it usually doesn't end up sequential anyways. They're not renumbering the whole road to add an exit, so you get exits 5A, 5B, 6 anyways.
¹we're in for a world of hurt if we ever get on board with metric…