-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 822
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Use surface in addition to tracktype for highway=track #2513
Comments
2016-12-15 22:31 GMT+01:00 Holger Jeromin <[email protected]>:
This raises the question which tag has priority. I would fallback to
surface if no tracktype is there.
no, it's not about "priority", because the issue is about showing both,
tracktype and surface.
|
A small solution would be fallback to surface if no tracktype is there. But this would be revisited by implementing #110. |
I am pretty sure that it is not feasible, and I would expect these values to generally be consistent (there are cases like extremely overgrown asphalt track, but it is fairly rare) |
Closing this since rendering both tracktype and surface does not seem to be feasible, removing tracktype rendering is suggested in #4322 instead. |
I guess it could be confusing ;)
but it wouldn't be technically impossible to show both, tracktype and
surface, e.g. tracktype could be shown as line width and surface through
dashes. Or opacity for tracktype. Or encode something in the casing...
|
I never liked the tracktype numbers, so i added only a surface tag. But sadly this style does only support tracktype on tracks.
This raises the question which tag has priority. I would fallback to surface if no tracktype is there.
Related to #110
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: