Route relation for West Coast Expressway

I have noticed that the route relation for Malaysia’s West Coast Expressway (WCE) is broken.

From the official WCE website, I have come to realise that the expressway is not a single stretch of continuous highway, but that it is broken into three parts.

So should the WCE route relation in the OSM database continue to remain broken? Is my understanding correct that all routes should be closed ways and should not be broken? And if so, would it be better to create three separate route relations for the 3 WCE parts?

I would suggest making 3 separate relations for WCE. And another relation combining that 3 parts with 2 parts of Federal Route 5. WCE is actually sharing those two parts of Federal Route 5. Ref West Coast Expressway - Wikipedia

I will keep them as “broken” segments. The continuity (in reality) is what it is.

1 Like

Do you mean, “The non-continuity (in reality) is what it is.” ?

If we kept the route relation purposely broken, wouldn’t this confuse a lot of other mappers? Because the first impression is, “This route relation is broken. It needs to be fixed.”

That was what happened to me. I was mapping the origins of a stream, and when I tried to upload my edit, JOSM validation checker warned me that the downstream portion (which was already mapped by someone else) crossed with WCE. So I created a bridge for that portion of the WCE and uploaded my edit and thought nothing more of it. The next day, other mappers commented that I had broken the WCE route relation. I was horrified! “Oh no, I better fix it fast before AkuAnakTimur gets upset with me,” I thought.

I spent a good half hour trying to “make the jig-saw puzzle fit” and just couldn’t. You can imagine my frustration when I finally figured out why (ie the non-continuity of the WCE is what it is in reality). :sweat_smile:

Is there an OSM standard on how to map non-continuous expressways like this? Any idea how UK does it?

Much better.

Usually I’m not too concerned with route relations that are very specific - personally I think it probably is helpful in some cases for example, keeping tabs with sections that used to be still under construction and later updating them when they’re ready for traffic.

One striking example I see is the (indirect) usage in Wikipedia articles - it somewhat helps Wikipedia editors to visualise these route. Probably that’s why, out of the blue, someone said that your edit (unfortunately) broke the WCE route relation.

There’s one motorway in the UK that seems to share similarities to this case: The A1(M), which is part of the A1 road.

Later edits, here are some Wikipedia links: A1 road, A1(M). Do note that certain parts of A1(M) used to be the ordinary A1 road, only upgraded to motorway standards, probably with some realignment here and there.

Ah, tq for this info. As at today, I see that the A1(M) had undergone 260 edits. And it still remains purposely “broken”.

So I guess this sets the standard on how to map non-contiguous expressways. Route relations can be broken because “the non-continuity of the expressway is what it is in reality.”

I guess we mappers just need to shift our paradigm to embrace the idea that “not all relations must be contiguous and unbroken”.

Tq for this discussion, dear friend. It is much appreciated.

1 Like