You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
The tag scenic=yes is for marking roads with scenic views, but currently it is not rendered. I think a good way to render it would be like how Michelen road maps show scenic roads, with a green outline.
The boundary of leisure=nature reserve would be a good fit I think, if the width of the line is reduced a bit. I made a quick mockup of how it could look:
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Note the tag as documented is not meant for scenic roads, it is meant for roads signed to be scenic. Tagging scenic roads that are not signed as such would be inherently non-verifiable - though a large portion of current use of the tag is not according to the definition, in Germany it is for example mostly used on paths and tracks in a completely subjective way.
I don't think we should render that, we already have lots of attributes on roads we render and additional ones we want to render (#2621, #110) so there is hardly room to also show such a relatively minor and ultimately fairly arbitrary distinction.
The tag scenic=yes is for marking roads with scenic views, but currently it is not rendered. I think a good way to render it would be like how Michelen road maps show scenic roads, with a green outline.
The boundary of leisure=nature reserve would be a good fit I think, if the width of the line is reduced a bit. I made a quick mockup of how it could look:
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: