Talk:BSicon/Categorization
Icons for railway descriptions/set green: moved
← Older revision
Revision as of 22:49, 28 March 2013
Line 92:
Line 92:
:::Accusing someone of something he didn't do is not very civil, you know. I have checked my contibs and found only a single redirect created by me. About categorization - again, I didn't start it. There were two cats, [[:Category:Icons for railway descriptions/set green|set green]] (with subcats) and [[:Category:Icons for footpath descriptions|footpath descriptions]]; both contained some unique files and both missed some relevant files. Including ''existing'' redirects instead of originals was a way to show other users that one doesn't need to constantly switch between "fXXX" and "YYY green" when creating a template, but just stick to a single pattern. In contrast, after your recent edits (adding all FORDs, WBANKs etc. to set green) the two categories are now nearly duplicate. Maybe then it would be easier to delete [[:Category:Icons for footpath descriptions|footpath descriptions]] and promote set green to the root category, like [[:Category:Icons for railway descriptions/set blue|set blue]]?
:::Accusing someone of something he didn't do is not very civil, you know. I have checked my contibs and found only a single redirect created by me. About categorization - again, I didn't start it. There were two cats, [[:Category:Icons for railway descriptions/set green|set green]] (with subcats) and [[:Category:Icons for footpath descriptions|footpath descriptions]]; both contained some unique files and both missed some relevant files. Including ''existing'' redirects instead of originals was a way to show other users that one doesn't need to constantly switch between "fXXX" and "YYY green" when creating a template, but just stick to a single pattern. In contrast, after your recent edits (adding all FORDs, WBANKs etc. to set green) the two categories are now nearly duplicate. Maybe then it would be easier to delete [[:Category:Icons for footpath descriptions|footpath descriptions]] and promote set green to the root category, like [[:Category:Icons for railway descriptions/set blue|set blue]]?
:::That aside, I support switching to "fXXX" pattern to match "uXXX" - in the end, it is 5 characters shorter :). Ex's should become "uexXXX", right? [[User:YLSS|YLSS]] ([[User talk:YLSS|talk]]) 15:33, 10 February 2013 (UTC)
:::That aside, I support switching to "fXXX" pattern to match "uXXX" - in the end, it is 5 characters shorter :). Ex's should become "uexXXX", right? [[User:YLSS|YLSS]] ([[User talk:YLSS|talk]]) 15:33, 10 February 2013 (UTC)
+
+
== Icons for railway descriptions/set green ==
+
+
=== Footpaths vs. railways ===
+
+
''Moved from [[User talk:Tuvalkin]].''
+
+
I hope you do not mind that I've reverted your adding several [[:Category:Icons for footpath descriptions|specifically footpath icons]] to set green. The roots in question are FORD, JCT, OBJ, WBANK and STRd/u variations. If you insist that they should be present in railways category as well, I guess it would be better to start adding them to some new "set f" category. [[User:YLSS|YLSS]] ([[User talk:YLSS|talk]]) 09:04, 19 March 2013 (UTC)
+
+
:I think they should have remained, as railways is the largest, and therefore (by default) the "master" category. (However, maybe the WBANK icons should be redrawn to match WASSER…) [[User:Useddenim|Useddenim]] ([[User talk:Useddenim|talk]]) 10:58, 19 March 2013 (UTC)
+
+
::You should consult the developers of various "long-distant walks in the UK" etc. on that. They may practice a different philosophy ;) [[User:YLSS|YLSS]] ([[User talk:YLSS|talk]]) 12:02, 19 March 2013 (UTC)
+
+
:::Which ''that'' do you mean? Recategorizing? or redrawing? [[User:Useddenim|Useddenim]] ([[User talk:Useddenim|talk]]) 01:33, 20 March 2013 (UTC)
+
::::Primarily redrawing. [[User:YLSS|YLSS]] ([[User talk:YLSS|talk]]) 07:16, 20 March 2013 (UTC)
+
+
I think that in Commons we should focus on the essence of these images, and not so much on their specific usages. What we have here is a vast family of “icons” (they are not really icons, but no gain in questioning '''that''' now) which have one thing in common — their filenames start with "BSicon_" and therefore they are usable with a specific set of templates (which are not developed centrally, but that’s another matter we should address some day). As I see it, our job is to ensure that
+
#Those icons are categorized and otherwise displayed in a way that users can easily pick what they need to build their own diagramas in wikipedia.
+
#There is a set of logical naming conventions so that a casual user can figure out how to name a newly introduced icon, analogous to others already in place.
+
#All icons share certain geometric and topological (and even esthetic) features that allow them to be used together seamlessly.
+
+
What we should not care about in Commons is the semantics of that usage. People are using these icons and the templates mostly for railways, yes, but, just like there is the footpaths and the canals, there’s the ancient roman highways in wp:la,, several buslines and road network and, who knows, pipelines or flow charts — and many diagrammatic uses that should be transparent to us.
+
+
So, I agree that it should be using things like "set_f" ASAP, centralizing all 008000 green icons, regardless of their intended use — even if we’ll be primarily thinking about rail (note that things like OBJ or WBANK could be used for railways, too, and there is even a suggestion in wp:en that LOCK could be used to identify rack railways in diagrams.) So, yes, I disagree of your reversions.
+
+
I hope soon we’ll be able set straight the whole matter of categorization of BSicons — which for now, thanks mostly to the autistic and quirky habits of Axpde, is running afoul of several Common’s categorization guidelines. (I tried to go against that by adding connections to external categories, such as [[:Category:Orange icons]] in [[:Category:Icons for railway descriptions/set orange]] — we’ll see how long that lasts unchallenged.) The main problem, as was once briefly touched by DePiep (yet another cool customer), is that the trunk of the tree category is [[:Category:Icons for railway descriptions]], instead of [[:Category:BSicon]]. Also there should be multiple concurrent tree category topologies, as is done for any image in commons. Having slashed category names, by the way, is a mixed blessing, and maybe we’d be better off without those.
+
+
All this, of course, should discussed centrally. -- [[User:Tuvalkin|Tuválkin]] [[User talk:Tuvalkin|✉]] 14:55, 19 March 2013 (UTC)
+
:Most comprehensively! I can't rival that eloquence;). So your intention is to get rid of [[:Category:Icons for footpath descriptions]]? If so, I back you. [[User:YLSS|YLSS]] ([[User talk:YLSS|talk]]) 15:02, 19 March 2013 (UTC)
+
+
::Well, I think that [[:Category:Icons for footpath descriptions]] (and also [[:Category:Icons for railway descriptions]]) should be what their names imply — and include things like [[:File:Fußweg P7090247.JPG]] or [[:File:Fareskilt 25.PNG]] (aptly in neatly named subcategories, of course), for that’s how Commons’ categories usually work. There should be "See also:" links to [[:Category:BSicon]], too, at all those generic categories about rout diagrams, mapping signs, etc. But that’s not going to be a swift, simple change. Fornow, I suggest that we keep [[:Category:Icons for railway descriptions]] “clean”, as a future [[:Category:BSicon]], and '''ignore''' [[:Category:Icons for footpath descriptions]] and [[:Category:Icons for canal descriptions]] (which are currently incomplete mirror repositories for set_f and set_g). (Also: Congratulations for your hard work renaming and fixing the usage of so many icons!) -- [[User:Tuvalkin|Tuválkin]] [[User talk:Tuvalkin|✉]] 15:16, 19 March 2013 (UTC)
+
:::{Thanks; I also got [[uk:Обговорення користувача:YLSS|sgushenka]] for that! [[User:YLSS|YLSS]] ([[User talk:YLSS|talk]]) 17:40, 19 March 2013 (UTC))
+
::::Vkusniĭ!! -- [[User:Tuvalkin|Tuválkin]] [[User talk:Tuvalkin|✉]] 01:54, 20 March 2013 (UTC)
+
:::If you move the aforementioned icons to "set f", please consider creating some subcat. Having 100+ icons on one page is quite confusing. [[User:YLSS|YLSS]] ([[User talk:YLSS|talk]]) 23:25, 19 March 2013 (UTC)
+
::::Yes, sure. If anything, I’m usually to blame for the opposite — creating categories with too few items in them (which later fill up, as expected), especially those under [[:Category:Trams in Lisbon]]. -- [[User:Tuvalkin|Tuválkin]] [[User talk:Tuvalkin|✉]] 01:54, 20 March 2013 (UTC)
+
+
=== "set blue" and "set green" ===
+
+
''Removed from [[Talk:BSicon]]''
+
+
Amongst those megabytes of talks I just found the suggestion to replace
+
* '''set blue''' by '''set u'''
+
* '''set green''' by '''set f'''
+
AFAIK this is to free those names for "new" blue or green icons. I'm not sure whether it's such a good idea to have another "set blue" aside those standard light rail icons. Same with green, you're just moving "XXX green" to "fXXX", so what green color are you going to add?? [[User:Axpde|'''a'''×'''p'''de]][[User Talk:Axpde|Hello!]] 14:23, 19 March 2013 (UTC)
+
+
:::Axpde, why do you even bother to ask? Based on your recent behaviour w.r.t. the ABZ icons, you just go ahead and do whatever you please with no regard for the consensus, anyways. [[User:Useddenim|Useddenim]] ([[User talk:Useddenim|talk]]) 01:41, 20 March 2013 (UTC)g#
+
+
:I first proposed it under [[#Blues]] & [[#Set B4EEB4]] above, respectively. "Green" could be reserved for current "vert"; and in this case there is not so much to change, so it can be done quite painlessly. Blue/u I do not touch. [[User:YLSS|YLSS]] ([[User talk:YLSS|talk]]) 14:31, 19 March 2013 (UTC)
+
+
::Eventually "set blue" will be "set u", too. Recategorizing, unlike renaming, hardly affects the projects and can be done with zero disruption.
+
::There’s also a "set red", which nobody confuses for the (dark) red default set.
+
::The advantages of all this should be obvious, and YLSS is on the spot: He has good ideas, discusses with the rest of us, adheres to consensus, and then he works hard at implementing them with minimal damage — an example, really.
+
::(Funny how he sneers at «those megabytes of talks». Yes, we do discuss stuff — shocking, huh? And every six months he comes out of the woodwork and use his admin rights to undo the carefully build up consensus. Hopefully, not for long. Incidentally, there’s no need to create new sections for people who cannot be arsed to read the whole discussion. Lets keep threads intact, please!)
+
::-- [[User:Tuvalkin|Tuválkin]] [[User talk:Tuvalkin|✉]] 16:25, 19 March 2013 (UTC)
+
+
:::(Only I would like the consensus to be not the two of us, as it often is. Input from others would be most appreciated, even if that would mean a brief glance through these 168 KB. [[User:YLSS|YLSS]] ([[User talk:YLSS|talk]]) 16:48, 19 March 2013 (UTC))
== Axpde's single-tree fetish ==
== Axpde's single-tree fetish ==
/image%2F0119748%2F20140527%2Fob_5bc3f3_alfred-molet-timbre-postal-01.JPG)
/https%3A%2F%2Fassets.over-blog.com%2Ft%2Fcedistic%2Fcamera.png)
/image%2F0119748%2F20140527%2Fob_49a920_alfred-molet-timbre-postal-01.JPG)
/image%2F0119748%2F20140511%2Fob_63b87d_carte-02.jpg)
