Closed pastk closed 2 weeks ago
Any screenshots in good quality? )
Comparison with the last beta:
Comparison with the last release:
Cycling lines are still too prominent for the general style, which looks dirtier now. Cyclists are only a subgroup of all our users. We don't highlight paths on the main style, why highlighting cycling paths then? Let's make them more prominent in the outdoors style, and grayish in the main style, to avoid distracting most users from the map.
Cycling lines are still too prominent for the general style, which looks dirtier now. Cyclists are only a subgroup of all our users. We don't highlight paths on the main style, why highlighting cycling paths then?
These PRs are not intended to "highlight" cycleways anymore than they were already. They change the color and patterns, but strive to keep the cycling / non-cycling balance as is.
If your intention is to change the status quo balance then please create a new issue for that. These set of interdependent PRs is complex enough already.
Let's make them more prominent in the outdoors style, and grayish in the main style, to avoid distracting most users from the map.
I don't think the Outdoors style is suitable for urban cycling, e.g.
I've reduced cycleways opacity on overview zooms a little more:
compared to the previous beta
compared to the last release
@biodranik @vng PTAL!
@pastk let's activate the separate issue to add a cycling layer, with a list of TODOs, including moving these tracks from general style to cycling one. I prefer to see a clean general map without highlighting outdoor or cycling routes, many users like OM style right for that, that it's not too colorful.
Compared to beta #8018 it makes dedicated/segregated cycleways a little more transparent at z13-14 while shared paths a little bit more visible.
Closes #8018