<div dir="ltr">I second - those keys should be cleaned up to be more consistent. My only concern is that we overload the meaning of wikimedia_commons to mean both a single image and a category, using namespace prefix as part of the value.<div><br></div><div>IMO it should be just the name of the file, without the namespace prefix. Categories would then go into a separate key, e.g. `wikimedia_commons_category` (or could shorten it to `commons_category` and `commons_image` for simplicity?).</div><div><br></div><div>With the way it is done now, someone could use a different namespace or no namespace at all -- `wikimedia_commons=List of famous grave images on this cemetery` or even `=Template:famous pictures of Notre Dame`, and the data consumer wouldn't know if this is an accidental omission of the `File:` prefix needs to be handled in a special way, etc.</div><div><br></div><div>Regardless - as long as the usage is consistent, I'm all for it.</div></div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Mon, Jan 20, 2020 at 4:01 PM Paul Allen <<a href="mailto:pla16021@gmail.com">pla16021@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr">On Mon, 20 Jan 2020 at 20:45, pangoSE <<a href="mailto:pangose@riseup.net" target="_blank">pangose@riseup.net</a>> wrote:<br></div><div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
<div bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<p>I recently stumbled upon the tag wikimedia_commons see <a href="https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:wikimedia_commons" target="_blank">https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:wikimedia_commons</a></p>
<p>Its definition is: "<span style="color:rgb(37,37,37);font-family:sans-serif;font-size:14px;font-style:normal;font-variant-ligatures:normal;font-variant-caps:normal;font-weight:400;letter-spacing:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px;background-color:rgb(255,255,255);text-decoration-style:initial;text-decoration-color:initial;display:inline;float:none">links to
related Wikimedia Commons' media of the feature "<br></span></p></div></blockquote><div>Yep. That's correct, apart from the word "links." They're not really links. Not in</div><div>the HTML meaning of the word.<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div bgcolor="#FFFFFF"><p><span style="color:rgb(37,37,37);font-family:sans-serif;font-size:14px;font-style:normal;font-variant-ligatures:normal;font-variant-caps:normal;font-weight:400;letter-spacing:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px;background-color:rgb(255,255,255);text-decoration-style:initial;text-decoration-color:initial;display:inline;float:none">
</span></p>
<p>But, the only 2 examples contain no links (as in URL-links but
instead file- and category names):</p>
<ul>
<tt>wikimedia_commons=<a>File:Bicycle</a> crossing, Poland, Kraków,
Josepha Conrada.JPG<br>
wikimedia_commons=Category:St Paul, Birmingham</tt></ul></div></blockquote><div>Yep. That's correct.<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div bgcolor="#FFFFFF"><ul>
</ul>
<p><tt>I see in the database that a lot of image= tags contains
direct urls to Wikimedia Commons.</tt></p></div></blockquote><div>You CAN do that, if you want. But the image tag is a bit of a mess, because</div><div>more than one format has been used for the value (URLs and wikimedia</div><div>references, as well as others). So best to use wikimedia_commons=* for</div><div> wikimedia commons images.<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<p><tt>I suggest we discuss changing the definition to:</tt><tt> "</tt><span style="color:rgb(37,37,37);font-family:sans-serif;font-size:14px;font-style:normal;font-variant-ligatures:normal;font-variant-caps:normal;font-weight:400;letter-spacing:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px;background-color:rgb(255,255,255);text-decoration-style:initial;text-decoration-color:initial;display:inline;float:none">File- or category name to related
Wikimedia Commons' media of the feature "<br></span></p></div></blockquote><div>Sounds sensible. Actually, I hadn't considered using the category name and didn't</div><div>know it worked with any carto that handles File (such as gk.historic.place).<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div bgcolor="#FFFFFF"><p><span style="color:rgb(37,37,37);font-family:sans-serif;font-size:14px;font-style:normal;font-variant-ligatures:normal;font-variant-caps:normal;font-weight:400;letter-spacing:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px;background-color:rgb(255,255,255);text-decoration-style:initial;text-decoration-color:initial;display:inline;float:none">
</span></p>
<p><span style="color:rgb(37,37,37);font-family:sans-serif;font-size:14px;font-style:normal;font-variant-ligatures:normal;font-variant-caps:normal;font-weight:400;letter-spacing:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px;background-color:rgb(255,255,255);text-decoration-style:initial;text-decoration-color:initial;display:inline;float:none">Furthermore I would like to hear if
anyone have any problems with mass re-tagging of all commons
URLs in image and wikimedia_commons tags to the above format. I
will keep the changesets per country or smaller.<br></span></p></div></blockquote><div>See guidelines on bulk/automated edits. There are likely to be many objections, even</div><div>if your proposal is sensible and there aren't many to change.<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div bgcolor="#FFFFFF"><p><span style="color:rgb(37,37,37);font-family:sans-serif;font-size:14px;font-style:normal;font-variant-ligatures:normal;font-variant-caps:normal;font-weight:400;letter-spacing:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px;background-color:rgb(255,255,255);text-decoration-style:initial;text-decoration-color:initial;display:inline;float:none">
</span></p><p>
PPS: I also suggested that we start rendering images on feature
pages on <a href="http://openstreetmap.org" target="_blank">openstreetmap.org</a>,<br></p></div></blockquote><div>Also seems sensible. Sorta like what gk.historic.place does on historic/heritage</div><div>POIs with images if you click on them for details. Or, if ever we move to vector</div><div>maps, maybe details would appear in a pop-up if you hover over a POI. I think</div><div>this is a good idea, but others may have different opinions.</div><div><br></div><div>-- <br></div><div>Paul</div><div><br></div></div></div>
_______________________________________________<br>
Tagging mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Tagging@openstreetmap.org" target="_blank">Tagging@openstreetmap.org</a><br>
<a href="https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging</a><br>
</blockquote></div>