Looking at your question from last week, one of the routes you seem to be interested in is: https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/416471
Firstly, could I ask anyone in DWG or the French community reading this to check the sourcing of the is route, as quoting a URL as a source rings alarm bells, especially when the only copyright notices on that source say reproduction is forbidden. Normally, approved sources for OSM will have short names that can be found in the wiki.
That route definition has a branch, at the bottom, which means it is impossible to define a single ordering for the route. It also has one way sections, e.g. https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/294310647 which again mean there is no single unique path (unless you define the direction of travel).
It is actually sorted quite well, so should be easy to fix up into the correct order, except for the branch at the bottom. There are conventions as to the correct order for one way sections: list everything in the forwards direction, in forwards order, then everything in the reverse direction but in reverse order of traversal.
As an example of a sorting error that does exist, https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/294310647 and the next way with the same name are in the wrong relative order. (Also, if I understand the name correctly, it is wrong. I think it says tow path, which is a description, not a name. If that is the case, it should not have a name tag.
What has really gone wrong here though is that, in three places, someone has added whole routes, not just the ways that make up the route. That is not allowed by the wiki, and nor do either JOSM or the www.openstreetmap.org seem to understand that. The sub-routes aren’t even in their correct relative positions in the overall route.
Although I could fix these, I’m concerned that I might be compounding copyright violation by doing so.