Pattern stylings for forest and grass #5489
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
|
Thank you @RudyTheDev !
We haven't had interest in adding more fill patterns, but I'm happy to merge pull requests for these. I think they generally help people edit with iD 👍 |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This adds a "forest" pattern for "landuse=forest" and "natural=wood"; "grass" pattern for "landuse=grass" and "natural=meadow". Also reuses "wetlands" pattern for "natural=scrub". (Although I notice the pattern definitions do not make a distinction between tags and values, i.e. "amenity=orchard" shows orchard pattern but with generic amenity borders.)
A sample use case where forest, grass and some other landuse (allotments here) appear close together:
P. S. What's the general stance on adding new patterns? I saw the "orchard" one, which is quite specific. At the same time, there was no "forest" one, which is very common.