Barstow, California, USA - Motorway is seen in OSM Editor but not JOSM

Communities United States
1

When I open OSM to this city in the Editor I can see the I-15 freeway already coded into OSM. However when I open the same city in JOSM a 5 mile section of the freeway is missing. Why? How can this be fixed?

2

Can you give a lat/lon or some other bounds where you see the problem?

I just opened up JOSM and loaded data along I-15 from one end of Barstow to the other and it looks like it is all there.

3

Starting at 34.8858056 -1170144206 heading SW to 34.8711057 -117.076914 and other places I-15 is not showing. Selecting a segment that can be seen. Under Tags – ‘Member Of’ list says "route(‘15’ 610 members incomplete)

4

JOSM I-15 incomplete segments list

5

In either the relation box or in the “member of” for a segment of the relation, do a right click and select “Download incomplete members” to get all ways that are part of the relation.

Neither the north or south bound route relations are nicely sorted so it is not easy to see if there is a real gap or if the gaps are an artifact of the lack of sorting. I am tempted to sort them but that always takes me some time and fiddling. . .

6

As someone who has edited (usually with JOSM, not iD) literally thousands of relations in OSM, (mostly type=route, but many other kinds such as type=boundary and type=site) about editing relations with JOSM, I say:

  1. As you complete editing a type=route relation, click the “Sort” button just before closing the relation editing dialog window. This will “gather together contiguous elements” in the relation, showing any “gaps” if there are any. This works for both bidirectional routes (with forward and backward role tags) and unidirectional routes (for routes with no role tags which denote the entire route in a single direction, to be paired in a super-relation with another route going in the opposite direction). This is intended to, and actually does, facilitate actually making the route fully contiguous, which a route is, if it is well-formed. Conversely, a route which is not fully contiguous is not well formed.
  1. “Sorting” relations like this is not strictly required, but it promotes “good hygiene” in (route) relations, ever-moving them closer and closer to being well-formed (by being contiguous, with the effort it takes to achieve that). Some downstream use cases (like a renderer which simply displays a route) don’t really depend on route relations being sorted. Other use cases, like a router, very likely do depend on this, or greatly benefit from relations being sorted (and fully well-formed).

Thank you. OSM’s future (of route relation consumption, by renderers, routers and more) thanks you, too. Together, we can improve (route) relations in OSM to being that-much-closer to being 100% well-formed.