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
Currently, areas of natural=sand in a river are rendered, but areas of natural=shingle aren't. That's not consistent. Could you please render natural=shingle in a river, too?
Thank you for mentioning this. We have recently been discussing how to render areas of bare_rock in the intertidal zone and in rivers, and natural=shingle is also another feature that could be shown in the same way.
Note that natural=beach with surface= currently renders the pattern above water areas, but I agree that not all areas of shingle along a river can be tagged as natural=beach
(Also natural=sand should not render above water. Areas of sand formed by moving water along rivers, lakes and seas should be tagged natural=beach)
I'm unsure whether areas of shingle or sand at a river borders can be considered beaches because they often have a very different shape than areas of shingle or sand at lakes or seas due to the lateral instead of a vertical movement of the water. Example (location):
Currently, areas of natural=sand in a river are rendered, but areas of natural=shingle aren't. That's not consistent. Could you please render natural=shingle in a river, too?
Screenshot is from here.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: