File talk:BlankMap-World.svg/Archive 2

Update required!

The most important. The colors have to be set to the standard convention of en:WP:WPMAP as follows:

Color	Hex	RGB	Sample	Used for
Black	#000000	0, 0, 0		Primary label color
Brown	#A08070	160, 128, 112		Political borders. Country, state, and province borders should be brown.
Light brown	#D0C0A0	208, 192, 160		Secondary political borders.
Light yellow	#FFFFD0	255, 255, 208		Primary territory of interest, or one of four choices for four-color maps.
Pink	#FFD0D0	255, 208, 208		Another color to be used for four-color maps.
Orange	#F8A20C	248, 162, 12		A third color to be used for four-color maps.
Green	#3CE67B	60, 230, 123		A fourth color to be used for four-color maps.
Light blue	#CEFEF2	206, 254, 242		An alternate color to be used for four-color maps.
Orange	#F7D3AA	247, 211, 170		Alternative color for the above Tan (surrounding territories).
Medium blue	#9EC7F3	158, 199, 243		Bodies of water. Oceans or lakes.
Blue	#1821DE	24, 33, 222		Water borders, if necessary. For lake or ocean borders that need a color contrasting with surrounding land, or for rivers.
Red	#B00000	176, 0, 0		Points of interest. Cities, especially.
Red-orange	#F07568	240, 117, 104		Alternative color for the above Red (points of interest).
Medium red	#E0584E	224, 88, 78		Border color for areas highlighted in Red-orange
Green	#A0F090	160, 240, 144		Parks or natural preservation areas

1. The present blank map is based on the File:World map pol 2005 v02.svg. CIA doesn't appear to be hosting it any more. But all the original .pdf files are available in the Perry-Castañeda Library Map Collection. By the way, some user has converted the 2008 map: File:CIA WorldFactBook-Political world.svg, but I do not know, how good it is.
2. At the moment there are no separate options for coloring inland and sea borders. So, if one makes the inland borders thicker to set value, it completely destroys the coastline of Norway or Greenland. So I propose, to make separate Ocean borders as here: File:Map of USA with state names.svg, or in the original CIA - The World Factbook - Political Map of the World.
3. I know, I already ask too much, but another request :-) Please, make optional stripes as here: File:World map stripes for shading.PNG, because some complex maps, as this one: File:Free Trade Areas.PNG can not be converted to .svg otherwise. Thanks!
4. It would as well be nice to have an option of showing the grid through CSS.
5. Kosovo should be present (at least optionally), and the claimed territories, and the other unrecognized states, where possible. After all, most of the other maps should be derived from this one.
6. Those, who are capable, please, update the map. But all this is a complex job, and could wait until the April, when they release the Political map for 2009. Sorry, for all this :-) Emilfaro (talk), 23:59, 19 January 2009 (UTC) - 03:42, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

Have you even read the description of this image? Kosovo is available. Has there been any significant changes in national borders since this map was last updated? If not then why the need for a syncing. Stripes can easily be added for derivative files. Since this image is vector based it doesn't make much sense to produce a map such as File:World map stripes for shading.PNG since that one exists due to the limitations of raster images. If one is still needed it can always be created as a separate file. As for the "standard" colours, why? This is a default map designed only for the purpose of making derivative maps, any colouring can be added to the derivative maps. This is quite apart from the fact that there is nothing "standard" about the colours except for them being the convention recently decided upon by a small set of people at en.wiki. /Lokal_Profil 15:03, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

As for the code being W3C invalid please read Template talk:ValidSVG about why this isn't necessarily so. /Lokal_Profil 15:07, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

That one has not really been my request. I have merely integrated it in from the previous versions of the page. Emilfaro (talk) 10:23, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

French color set

There is as well another set of colors: fr:Projet:Cartographie/Recommandation/Carte géographique, fr:Projet:Cartographie/Recommandation/Carte topographique. How can it be determined, which one should be used for the commons blank maps for the adoption of a common standard? Don't tell me it is kilometers vs. miles again :-) Maybe this could be voted on? Emilfaro (talk) 10:44, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

I personnaly will not encourage democratic vote in a such specific-technical issue. The best seems for me to still wait and see. Yug (talk) 07:33, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

Other partially recognized countries

If Kosovo is available then why not to code Abkahzia and South Ossetia support? SkyBon^{Talk\Contributions} 15:32, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

Recent map edits

I recombined Alaska, Hawaii, and Mainland USA. The description of the map states "A detailed SVG map with grouping enabled to connect all non-contiguous parts of a country's territory for easy colouring." Separating Alaska, Hawaii, and the mainland US defeats that purpose. Anybody who wants to edit the map with them separated will have little trouble doing so on their own. So this map should be left with them grouped.

Also, I converted the lakes to holes in their respective countries. I did this for a couple reasons. First, when drawing regions over these countries and clipping them, the 'lakes' would disappear instead of defining the clip border. When I converted them to holes, that no longer happened. Second, this only included completely internal lakes, not lakes on borders (e.g. Lake Victoria, the Great Lakes, etc.), so anyone wishing to work with all the lakes on the map would still be prevented from doing so. Thus having the lakes grouped as separate objects served no usable function. Plus, there was no rhyme nor reason to which lakes qualified for inclusion and which didn't. If a map is needed with the lakes of the world included and grouped for easy coloring, then a new map distinct from this one should be created for that purpose. Ninjatacoshell (talk) 18:57, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

Thank you! I didn't know objects could be made with "holes" in SVG, hense the reason for the separate "lakes" tag - the ones that were included with "lakes" were merely the ones that were too far from a border to make as a "border gap". I definitely approve! The map still needs cleaning up (as you can tell the file size is much bigger, have to determine where the extra code is; plus the "countries with holes" don't have their tag on them, so can't be selected in the usual way, this is just a simple matter of renaming their group. I hope to maybe look at that this weekend, but if anyone else wants to take a stab at it, they're more than welcome to! --Canuckguy (talk) 04:00, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

I saw that NuclearVacuum fixed the id tags again. However the file now also seems to be filled with Inkscape junk code (probably the reason the size got bosted again. Also (more importantly) the class info (necessary for CSS) seems to have been lost for several countries. Also Alaska and Hawaii have been broken out from the US which there is no reason to do since they have the same ISO code. The best thing is probably to go back to the last unbroken version (21:17, October 15, 2009 I think) and then apply the lake fix and Norfolk Islands, Tokelau to that one. The problem is that I don't know what the border and minor fixing applied in the last edits referr to. Might also be worth putting a note similar to that one on File:Samesex marriage in USA.svg on this page to prevent inkscape junk form creeping into the code. /Lokal_Profil 23:59, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

And now I've done just that. The difference is that the border fixes (in 00:01, November 22, 2009) haven't been applied (unless they affected only Norfolk Islands, Tokelau or the countries which got changed due to lake removal). Also Alaska and Hawaii have not been separated from the US (in my oppinion the shouldn't have been and a discussion is needed on the talk page before such implementation). Also the new upload indirectly fixes the class tag issues which came up during the previous edits and also those relating to the Norfolk Isalnds and Tokelau. /Lokal_Profil 00:44, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

By the way why is there a star in the code (in the definitions section). Is this a desired feature (e.g. for easy marking of capitals i derivative images) or leftover code from some experiment? /Lokal_Profil 00:45, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

When I mentioned I was separating Alaska and Hawaii from mainland US, I didn't literally mean it. What I meant was I wanted to combine all of Alaska's territory into a group, than all of Hawaii's territory, and all the territory that makes up mainland US, and than grouping all three into the US. This is like in the case of France, which contains area outside Europe, but you can still simply get L’Hexagone (Mainland France/European France) marked separately from all France. I didn't mean to cause confusion on that. —NuclearVacuum 02:30, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

I know that you didn't mean an actual separation. The difference between France's other areas (or the UK or China) or even Puerto Rico and Guam to Alaska and Hawaii is that the UN treats them as special and have assigned them their own ISO 3166-1 alpha-2 codes. This is not true for Alaska and Hawaii therefore they should not have been split of (even if still included in US) and given their own codes. The problem is that this sets the precedence for doing the same thing to all countries with subdivisions (which is something that has been discussed before, normally in the context of Scotland, England Wales etc.). Also your newest edit once again includes Inkscape junk code and has broken the CSS classes on the US mainland. I therefore reverted the chnge. If there were any code fixes (excluding Alaska and Hawaii grouping) then give a shout. /Lokal_Profil 10:45, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

Oh? Okay, I had no idea. —NuclearVacuum 14:15, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

No worries. The text editor updates look ok. /Lokal_Profil 14:31, 27 November 2009 (UTC)

On the other hand since all of the edits are related to the ISO code issue I mentioned below they will dissapear when I correct the code. I'll leave in the fx->frx change though since it brings the notation in line with the one used for China (and makes it clear that it isn't an ISO code (having three letters instead of two). / Lokal_Profil 14:57, 27 November 2009 (UTC)

Northern Cyprus and Taiwan?

When this map was first uploaded it contained Kosovo as a separate area from Serbia if desired. When Russia recognized the independence of Abkhazia and South Ossetia, I added them and made them in a similar manner that Kosovo was made. After looking through which states had limited recognition, I discovered two possible problems that I want to bring up. It involves Northern Cyprus and the Republic of China (Taiwan). Both states are similar to Abkhazia, Kosovo, and South Ossetia, in which they are recognized by only a few UN members.

Taiwan I can understand, because the state is more recognized as the government of the island and not all of China. But since it is currently considered a province of the PRC, shouldn't we have it combined with the PRC and have it separated in the manner that Hong Kong and Macau are?

The next issue I want to bring up is Northern Cyprus. This is simple, I think there should be a separate are for the state in the manner that Kosovo is made. I currently have it made up and ready to upload, but the only reason I question this is because I have recently learned that I can not upload anything that was made with Inkscape. That program is the only one I know how to work with at the moment. It may be a while before I can make something that is acceptable. I wanted to know if there was anybody who could help me out with this. —NuclearVacuum 14:32, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

Firstly Taiwan. Although China considers it to be a province it's recognised by most of the world to be a separate nation and not a part of China. The difference with it and Macao, say, is that Macao makes no independence claims. The difference between Tibet, say, and Taiwan is that although both make independence claims only one is "de facto" independent. Therefore Taiwan shouldn't be treated as a SAR of China.

As for Northern Cyprus I guess it's a similar situation to South Ossetia say and therefore becomes a judgement call on whether to have it separate or not. In my opinion one could have it separate in the same way as South Ossetia so that it normally goes under Cyprus unless explicitly selected (and has no border between the countries). But others might disagree so it's worth giving it a while to see what feedback you get.

To the important question on how to do the edits. The main thing here is that although you can use Inkscape to create the map you shouldn't upload what Inkscape outputs since it destroys the css classes (and adds junk code). The way to do it is to do your changes in Inkcape and then go into the built in XML editor and copy past the relevant paths into the original (non inkscape modified) code. Alternatively save the inkscape file under a separate name and then open both in a basic text editor.

An example: When I removed the lakes from Canada I did it in Inkscape, then went to the XML editor and looked at the object "path4906" (which is mainland Canada) which looks somewhat like the below

class  landxx ca
d      M 814.43303,201......
id     path4906

I then opened the original file in my text editor, searched for path4906 and found a line which looked something like the below

<path class="landxx ca" d="M 614.43303,201......." id="path4906"/>

Then I just copied the "M 814.43303,201......" string from the xml editor in Inkscape and pasted that over the "M 614.43303,201......" string in the text editor. I then found the paths corresponding to the now deleted lakes and deleted them (i.e. everything from "<path" to "/>"). Save the text file and it's done.

Obviously if you are creating new objects you need to be more careful but for minor edits this is essentially it. The other alternative is to upload the Inkscape saved map to File:test.svg and then ask here for the edit to be transferred to this file. /Lokal_Profil 15:56, 27 November 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for that. I have uploaded it to the image and it seemed to work just fine. Thank you again. —NuclearVacuum 18:10, 27 November 2009 (UTC)

Looks fine. Minuscule detail fixed to allow Northern Cyprus to be coloured together with Cyprus (when a colour hasn't been specified for Northern Cyprus). /Lokal_Profil 19:52, 27 November 2009 (UTC)

ISO code adherence

When looking through the code the other day I discovered that the class id's no longer adhere to the ISO codes. For instance Hong Kong has been changed to cn_hk rather then the correct hk, Reunion is now fr_re rather then the correct re. These changes seem to have been introduced in the 19:28, September 2, 2009 edit (or during the upload conflict just prior to it). I'll attempt to fix them all but please keep your eyes open for any that I might have missed. /Lokal_Profil 14:52, 27 November 2009 (UTC)

I went though the code and I fixed them up for you. Hong Kong is now "hk", Reunion is now "re", and so on. —NuclearVacuum 15:44, 27 November 2009 (UTC)

I put the xx_xx tags there in that fashion so that the "subdivisions" can be turned off, yet the other microstates can be left, if need be. I'll have to check when I get home if this still does what I want it to (btw, excellent, excellent work all of you on recent map edits! I haven't had the time to do anything with this, but I greatly approve of everything that has been done! I'm very proud of you!) --Canuckguy (talk) 15:14, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

Using Nugsl

can someone please explain concretely how to use this tool? the download site offers no thorough documentation aside from "er installing the software, open a command line terminal. Run the command `nugsl-worldmap` with no options to display a help screen." which i've tried to no avail and is quite frustrating, can someone please help? --Jgcooper (talk) 03:12, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

Guide IT for installation and use of the script nugsl

I made a page-guide in Italian language for installation and use of the script nugsl-worldmap, at this address http://www.ubaweb.it/miniguide/worldmap_tool.php.

If someone wants to translate the text in English I would be happy to publish it. GioCondor (talk) 16:39, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

All limited recognition states?

I see 4 states with limited recognition included here, why not all 10 of them? Outback the koala (talk) 06:34, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

Color update need

 Done

Hello, I'm a leading contributor of the en:Wikipedia:WikiProject Maps. There, we collected "de facto" maps conventions, currently in usage on the English, German, and French Wikipedias, which are by far the most active and organized communities in map making. In all those wikipedia, the de facto convention for blank maps's grey have now a value of #E0E0E0. The map makers have switch to this E0E0E0 value about 3 or 4 years ago. This change have been conscienciously made, graphists have express their will of a softer E0E0E0 grey, more web friendly, lighter than the dark grey #B9B9B9 proposed in the early times of wikipedia, around 2003~2004, when the online colors where not as light as today, in ... 2010.

2003~2004 grey	#B9B9B9 R:185 V:185 B:185 A:1
~2007 grey	#E0E0E0 R:224 V:224 B:224 A:1

De facto, the 3 most actives map makers communities generates maps with E0E0E0 grey. Following this de facto move, I have been hesitating for the last 2 years to update this BlankMap-World6.svg to #E0E0E0, but this file being both a "hero" of wikipedia and a really complexly coded file, I did nothing. Now, I think we really need to clarify the situation by updating this "hero" file to the de facto grey #E0E0E0. May some of you help me to do so. Regards, Yug (talk) 08:29, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

Sources:
Wiki-en: en:Wikipedia:WikiProject Maps/Conventions/Location maps > grey convention: #E0E0E0)
Wiki-fr: fr:Projet:Cartographie/Recommandation/Carte_géographique > grey convention: #E0E0E0)
Wiki-de: de:Wikipedia:Kartenwerkstatt/Positionskarten > SVG template, grey convention: #E0E0E0)

Yug (talk) 08:29, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

Ok. Since:

• The de facto consensus is clear and in favor of the new grey (based on 3 specific consensus);
• Since wikipedia's decisions are choices by consensus

I will apply the grey change soon to align the grey in this file with community's choice.

--Yug (talk) 09:18, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

Done. Yug (talk) 16:37, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

@Yug: Since this change almost 10 years ago, this world map has now been embedded as a general world outline into many templates (which have nothing to do with the location maps referenced above), where the default #e0e0e0 color seems to be too light to stand against white-colored oceans. I've updated the map to have a darker default grey for land – to suit exactly this purpose. I understand the dilemma of sometimes using this also as a base map for other local location maps (to which the EN/FR/DE grey conventions above apply) – but I think the editors creating location maps should be familiar with those conventions and be able to modify the color accordingly on a case-by-case basis. I'm open to suggestions, but it seems that simple-mindedly applying location-maps conventions to this map is not appropriate anymore. Cherkash (talk) 15:14, 17 February 2019 (UTC)

Inkscape bug

In Inkscape 0.46, my preview of File:SOWM2010 critical shortage.svg colored the Nagorno-Karabakh republic whenever Cambodia (.kh) was colored. Changing this name (in my file only) to "Nagorno-Karabakhx" in two places fixed this. I have no idea why. But Firefox seemed to render the image correctly without this change, so it may not be important - just noting it in case anyone else has trouble. Mike Serfas (talk) 03:07, 8 May 2010 (UTC)

I had the same bug when I made my "land" and "coast" tags (which is why they are now "landxx" and "coastxx" as Sao Tome kept messing up the "coast" tag (and although "nd" doesn't exist yet, pre-emptively "fixed" "land" too). I've been meaning to find some time to look at the new unrecognized states added to see how they work in there, whenever I get around to it, I hsould probably check the last two digits too and see if we can find a way around this.--Canuckguy (talk) 04:28, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

The best solution is probably to change all of the unrecognized states to something like "namexx" (or "nameyy" to make the ditinction from coast and land). /Lokal_Profil 21:53, 16 May 2010 (UTC)

I chose "xx" because it's not in the ISO-3166 namescape, and is guaranteed not to be used, there is no guarantee with "yy". I think maybe we can change the unrecognized states to a code in the "user defined" group in ISO 3166, which is aa, qm-qz, xa-xz, and zz - probably the xa-xz group as there's 26 (well 25 not counting xx) to work with, so perhaps Abkhazia's code can be "xa", Kosovo could be "xk", N. Cyprus "xc", etc. (This is also why I had France Metropolitan as "fx" rather than "frx" as is currently, as "fx" is reserved specifically for denoting "Metropolitan France" - should probably move China without SARs to the reserved group as well rather than "cnx" as a future "nx" could cause problems, maybe "qz" or something like that.)Canuckguy (talk) 02:25, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

Found an interesting glitch

I think I found a pretty funny problem (at least it is funny to me). I have been using the code to do maps instead of using Inkscape as I always do. Anyway, the code seems to be affecting any of the objects with full named IDs.

/*
 * 1960s
 */
.su, .us
{
  fill:#0a8e14;
}

Here is a sample code I did with my svg map of 1985. I simply wrote down the iso code for the Soviet Union (su) and the United States (us), but the final version had the Soviet Union, the United States, and Northern Cyprus in it. To make it short, it is the fact that there is a "us" in Northern Cyprus, so the code filled it in too. I thought this was just a random incident, but I tried it out with filling only the Netherlands Antilles, and it filled in "an" and "ocean". Isn't that weird? Anyway, I think I can solve the problem by replacing all the full named objects with user-assigned codes of the ISO 3166-1. I will upload something soon and show the corrections in the documentation. --NuclearVacuum (talk) 22:13, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

I have uploaded a new version that should correct the problem. I have kept the IDs the same, but have changed the class names. The new codes can be found here. Tell me what you think. If you don't like them, feel free to revert it. --NuclearVacuum (talk) 22:29, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

Thanks a lot! I was planning on doing something similar when I added Sint Maarten and Curacao on October 10 (I still plan on doing that update, by the way) but you beat me to it! There's still a few more tags I wanted to adjust, though, might do it then, if no one beats me to it.  :) How did you manage to do .su as it isn't on the countries list? --Canuckguy (talk) 00:56, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. =) /Lokal_Profil 10:19, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

I didn't mean to beat anybody. But if I may, "HA HA, I BEAT YOU!!" No seriously, I just thought it would be interesting to use those user-assigned codes from ISO, since they were made for that purpose. I guess you can say I am also a sucker for the ISO. As for the "su," that was from BlankMap-World 1985.svg (which I made). So in this one, the Soviet Union is still a nation. But the same principles exist on that file. Glad you like it. Glad to help out. --NuclearVacuum (talk) 15:13, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

Heh, no worries, probably best be done sooner rather than later anyways. I would suggest that the codes for Inkscape be changed as well, to keep everything uniform, etc.--Canuckguy (talk) 16:00, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

Adding the European Union?

I thought of something that might be interesting we could do. Since the European Union is a major political entity today, I believe it would be beneficial if we were to add it here. I don't mean by making a group with all the EU member states in it, but I mean by adding eu to all the EU member states. So for instance:

<g class="landxx coastxx de" id="de" transform="translate(-29.9017, -45.0745)">
    <path d="M 1367.638,334.944 C 1367.803,334.181 1367.563,334.133 1366.918,334.799 C 1367.158,334.848 1367.397,334.896 1367.638,334.944" id="path3832"/>

would now be

<g class="landxx coastxx de eu" id="de" transform="translate(-29.9017, -45.0745)">
    <path d="M 1367.638,334.944 C 1367.803,334.181 1367.563,334.133 1366.918,334.799 C 1367.158,334.848 1367.397,334.896 1367.638,334.944" id="path3832"/>

This won't have any major effect for the Inkspace users, and would have not effect any of the member states by themselves. This would be beneficial for that you can add .eu, and it would color in all the member states, rather than adding each one, one at a time. What do you think of this idea? --NuclearVacuum (talk) 16:58, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

I approve of this, there does seem to be a need on maps, go for it! (Speaking of adding entities to the map, a recent edit summary says you added French Southern & Antarctic Territories - is it just Kerugelen etc., or is it the part of the Antarctic mainland as well? And, most importantly (and should go in the documentation), what is the code for it?) (I also recommend that you fix, either in the file or in the documentation, not sure which it is, the disperance between the Inkscape codes and the text editor codes for the unrecognized countries.) --Canuckguy (talk) 00:19, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

+1 , only advantages. Yug (talk) 08:09, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

I am glad you like the EU idea. I have uploaded a version that has my ideas. As for the TAAF, it is an independent entity from Antarctica. A French department, the TAAF runs as a sovereign nation. The TAAF does contain France's Adelie Land, but it is not recognized as part of the TAAF (just as in all territorial claims in Antarctica). --NuclearVacuum (talk) 19:47, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

Marshall Islands

 Done

...are misplaced on the map. See e.g. File:Oceania.jpg, File:Map OC-Oceania.PNG: Marshall Islands are north (or north-east) of Nauru, whereas on this map, they are displayed to the west, halfway between Nauru and FSM.—Emil J. 15:19, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

This seems to have been fixed long time ago. Cherkash (talk) 15:31, 17 February 2019 (UTC)

Adding CSS classes for continents?

I would appreciate if the countries could be grouped by continents by adding for each country a class indicating to which continent it belongs (like in the above mentioned case for the European Union). So for example:

<g class="landxx coastxx de eu" id="de" transform="translate(-29.9017, -45.0745)">

Would be something like this:

<g class="landxx coastxx de eu europe" id="de" transform="translate(-29.9017, -45.0745)">

It is a good idea, but then you run into problems with transcontinental countries like Turkey, Russia, Egypt, etc. Turkey and Egypt *may* be possible as their parts in different continents are physically separated, but Russia would be impossible as the map currently is. --Canuckguy (talk) 15:19, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

Okay, that's right. A simple solution could be to decide based on the fact where most of a country's area belongs to (geographically). But there are also many other solutions, so I guess a single solution depends on the concrete purpose of the map and therefore cannot be generalized.

Netherlands Antilles

I have made a version of the map to be used on October 10, 2010 upon the dissolution of the Netherlands Antilles (and reverted, so that the "old" one is still in use by then, while still leaving the "new" one to be perused). Bonaire is now under the "nl" tag, and will be selected with the rest of the Netherlands, as it (as well as Saba and Sint Eustatius, not shown) will be an integral part of the Netherlands. I gave Curacao the code "qw" and Sint Maarten the code "qx" for now, these can be changed when the ISO assigns them their real codes (and, unlike Kosovo, I don't see any reason for them not to do it soon after October 10)

I also addressed the earlier complaint of the Marshalls being in the wrong place (I put them a little east of north of Nauru, as the map linked showed them more over western Kiribati than Nauru), it's not on the current version though, so that'll only change in October.

It seems that in all likelihood South Sudan will be declaring independence in January, at the very least I think that it would be a good idea to have it on the map like the other "non-recognized" countries. My SVG skills aren't good enough to add it, I would like to request that someone does. --Canuckguy (talk) 02:18, 18 September 2010 (UTC)

I would be more than happy to add South Sudan for you. --NuclearVacuum (talk) 16:37, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

Uninhabited territories

I noticed that somewhere along the line that two new territories were marked and circled on the map, South Georgia & South Sandwich Islands, and French Southern & Antarctic Territories. When I came up with my original list, there were several on the ISO 3166 list I didn't include on the map because they were uninhabited and thus I figured were of no need to most, if not any, map on Wikipedia. (Antarctica was an exception merely because of its size, but I have yet to see a Wikipedia map (other than ones merely illustrating the continents) that uses it, proving my point). Why were these two added and not others? I would like to have them removed (the land can be subsumed either into Antarctica for both cases or Falkland Islands for the first case and Antarctica in the latter), but I want to see some discussion on this first, as it's not my map. --Canuckguy (talk) 15:08, 25 October 2010 (UTC)

People who needs to represent with different colors (per statutes for example) overseas territories of France and of the United Kingdom? Sebjarod (talk) 15:54, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

Wow, you created this map? Nice to finally meet the artist. Sorry to burst your bubble, but I was the one who added the SGSSI and the TAAF to the map. The main reasoning I did this was because of politics and territorial claiming. As part of the Antarctic Treaty System, all areas south of the 60th parallel are international and are to be ungoverned. Both the SGSSI and the TAAF are above this, so are not politically ungoverned, or part of Antarctica. The original map had the SGSSI as part of the Falkland Islands, which is not the case at all. Prior to 1985, they were a dependent region of the Falkland Islands, but that is no longer the case. They are also not politically connected with the BAT, which is south of the 60th. The same can be said with the TAAF. Though it also includes France's claim in Antarctica, most leave Adelie Land out of it its census. I also believed that since the regions had their own ISO codes and flags, they were worthy of being represented in this map. --NuclearVacuum (talk) 16:12, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

Well, we have discussed the map over this discussion page many times (so you hardly just "met" me :)), and it does show my name as the original uploader of the map, but I refuse to take credit as the "creator", I always acknowledge myself as "standing on the shoulders of giants", especially Brianski, who made the previous version of the map - my major contribution was to group the non-contiguous parts of a nation's territory together under a single code to make the map easier to colour. I still am at a very beginner's level at SVG, so I'll gladly give others the credit for the map. Thanks for your reasonings as to why you have those two on there, I still think it may lead to a slippery slope personally. Perhaps a happy medium: don't have them as part of Antarctica, but also don't give them their own circle? --Canuckguy (talk) 22:03, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

Well apparently I have short term memory loss XP. I am not much of an SVG export either. Well, I like your idea, but I had something pop in my head, and I wanted to see what you think. There are already two separate circle groups, why not add a third? This third groups would be for uninhabited territories smaller than 20,000 square kilometers. So you can leave it out if you wanted to. --NuclearVacuum (talk) 00:48, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

Eh, not a fan of that. For starters, it could be hard deciding the size of the circle to make it visible and still unique from the other sizes. Secondly, there isn't really a need for it as there are no uninhabited territories over 20,000 sq km (except Antarctica). I would think that if they retain their codes, but are left without a circle (which, if you think about it, is exactly what Antarctica currently has), somewhat who wants to add GS and/or TF to a map and show them with a circle can easily edit the code to add the required circle for them (as I mentioned before, I have basic beginner's level SVG skill and I'm able to do it.). IMHO, circles are only for areas we want to draw attention to, and areas that will never get used don't need attention drawn to them.--Canuckguy (talk) 05:26, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

I was actually not saying to make a new circle size. What I had in mind was to use the size already used, but make it into its own category, so you can leave it blank, while the others can be seen. But what about other states that have limited populations? For instance, the Pitcairn Islands has a population smaller than the TAAF. I'm just saying. But I have nothing against removing the circles, provided that the TAAF and the SGSSI are their own entities. --NuclearVacuum (talk) 13:16, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

True about Pitcairn, however Pitcairn's residents are all permanent residents, I understand that TAAF's residents are seasonal scientists, none *live* there as their permanent home as I understand it. (Antarctica also has seasonal population (quite a bit, relatively speaking), but no permanent residents). As to your suggestion of another class for those places - I see nothing wrong with that and I think it will fit both our goals quite nicely! Go for it!--Canuckguy (talk) 15:55, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

Hm... never thought about that. Sorry, I guess I like to think of all nations as equal. But either way, I am going to be uploading what I came up with. I also added a new setting which should help eliminate the need to keep adding colors for the three areas that are not used in too many maps. I also made Antarctica, SGSSI, and TAAF as a separate class called "antxx". --NuclearVacuum (talk) 16:42, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

Subnational area

Why there are only 2 groups of Subnational areas? Should we consider more areas as subnational? Possible subnational areas without a class of "subxx" are listed below:

• Denmark (dk)
  • Greenland (gl)
  • Faroe Islands (fo)
• Australia (au)
  • Norfolk Island (nf)
• New Zealand (nz)
  • Cook Islands (ck)
  • Niue (nu)
  • Tokelau (tk)
• Netherlands (nl)
  • Aruba (aw)
  • Curaçao (qw)
  • Sint Maarten (qx)
• United Kingdom (uk)
  • Anguilla (ai)
  • Bermuda (bm)
  • British Virgin Islands (vg)
  • Cayman Islands (ky)
  • Falkland Islands (fk)
  • Gibraltar (gi)
  • Montserrat (ms)
  • Pitcairn Islands (pn)
  • Saint Helena (sh)
  • South Georgia and the South Sandwich Islands (gs)
  • Turks and Caicos Islands (tc)
  • Guernsey (gg)
  • Isle of Man (im)
  • Jersey (je)
• United States (us)
  • American Samoa (as)
  • Guam (gu)
  • Northern Mariana Islands (mp)
  • Puerto Rico (pr)
  • United States Virgin Islands (vi)

Besides, should we add these (subnational) areas not yet marked into this map?:

• Australia (au)
  • Christmas Island (cx)
  • Cocos (Keeling) Islands (cc)
• Finland (fi)
  • Åland Islands (ax)
• United Kingdom (uk)
  • British Indian Ocean Territory (io)
  • Ascension Island (ac)
  • Tristan da Cunha (ta)

--Tomchen1989 (talk) 13:12, 12 December 2010 (UTC)

Well, the subnational areas of France and China are integral parts of the country (essentially, French Guiana is to France and Macau is to China as Hawaii is to the US). Much data that is used for Wikipedia maps includes the French and Chinese subnational areas' data with their parent countries. The ones you mention above are autonomous enough that it woudln't make sense to group them.

As far as adding ones - the Australian ones have merit, Aland is also usually grouped with Finland in data, so it's best to leave it for now (there isn't much of a demand to make its data separate if needed like France and China's), the BIOT is uninhabited, and there isn't really a need for uninhabited territories (see above - if I'm wrong, I'd say put it in the same class as .gs and .tf), and there isn't a demand to add ac and ta.--Canuckguy (talk) 16:11, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

OK but especially for the statistics things, Hongkong and Macau are very different to the mainland China. Current radius of the subnational areas cirle are too small. Let's give them an integer value, I had em changed from 4.2337999 to 5, and other circles' radius changed from 6.0130301 to 6. --Tomchen1989 (talk) 16:13, 16 December 2010 (UTC)

Remove border

I noticed the recent tag asking for the border to be removed on this file. Is that referring to the excess whitespace transparent space around the map itself? Or the ovaloid border running around the map? If the former, I agree, but my SVG skills aren't good enough, perhaps someone can minimize this? (Being a ovaloid shape, whitespace closer to the poles is unavoidable) If the latter, why? We already have a few versions of this that have been rectangularized ... --Canuckguy (talk) 16:11, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

Done. I had outside whitespace removed, cleaned the code, and used a tab indent style to reduce the size to 1.15 MB, while the human-editable format is kept. --Tomchen1989 (talk) 22:40, 14 December 2010 (UTC)

No diff view for the code, not so convenient :( --Tomchen1989 (talk) 23:22, 14 December 2010 (UTC)

I do not like the new version with no space. It cuts off part of the ocean, and makes the image look very cramped. Please return to the original version, or make a newer version with some space. --NuclearVacuum (talk) 18:20, 26 December 2010 (UTC)

I've reverted the map back to the version with the white space. The version added by Tomchen1989 cuts portions of the ocean from the image, and removing the white space makes the image look cramped and squished. I request that we do not make any major format changes until there is a general consensus. Please and thank you. --NuclearVacuum (talk) 00:30, 28 December 2010 (UTC)

I think that the transparent version is better as it occupies lesser space, just dont know why to upload the bigger version

Here is an image I made showing the portion of the ocean that was cut off during the resizing. I would be much happier with the change if this were fixed. Please and thank you. --NuclearVacuum (talk) 16:43, 28 December 2010 (UTC)

I don't think the version without white space is "cramp", this one aims to be a original map for editors to modify, the unnecessary white space just makes it a little inconvenience. I saw lots of editors cut the space off by themselves when using it. However, WikiMedia Commons is free to upload to, you can still upload a new version with some white space.

For this, I consider it as a rendering bug of MediaWiki: when it yields a PNG from an SVG, the non-integer nominal width and the height of the SVG image cannot be recognized, they are rounded up or down to integers before resizing to a specific size PNG. So you see now the height is 432.83594, it is rounded up to 433 by MediaWiki, readers don't feel any uncomfortable for this. But unfortunately, the width 853.2157 is rounded down to 853, and some border was cut off in the PNG rendered by MediaWiki. However actually in the SVG image, it was not cut off. Well, since you really think this is a big problem, I enlarged the width to 853.52002 to compromise for the bug (the width is rounded up to 854 and the border is fully kept), and noted something in the description. --Tomchen1989 (talk) 03:43, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

Sorry. When I meant "cramped", I was referring to the fact that in the rush to remove the white space, areas were cut off (as mentioned above). --NuclearVacuum (talk) 13:46, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

Mixed

The circles for doms and sars after growth in size have mixed up withtheir neighbour circles, and also i think that succesors of netherlands antilles that dont became seperate parts must have a smaller circle like macau or reunion. —Preceding unsigned comment was added by 195.250.88.127 (talk) 09:15, 28 December 2010 (UTC)

The version

is the map delivered from here: http://www.umsl.edu/services/govdocs/wofact2008/docs/refmaps.html , as it seems to be the latest version —Preceding unsigned comment was added by 195.250.88.127 (talk) 09:29, 28 December 2010 (UTC)

Changing the colors

should the borders (which color is currently white) changed to black, became thiner and the color of the countries and their circles changed to gainsboro, i think that everyone will agree that current version shows to light color which is very bad seen. —Preceding unsigned comment was added by 195.250.88.127 (talk) 09:29, 28 December 2010 (UTC)

W6.svg's Documentation

Canuckguy, NuclearVacuum and others, do you keep the documentation updated ? if not, please keep this page in mind when you improve the map, or find some tools working with it. I will also do so. ;) Yug (talk) 19:48, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

I think I found a good solution to the whitespace issue

I have been trying to figure out the coding for weeks now, and I think I finally found it. I re-sized the map so that there remains some whitespace, but not enough to notice. You see, the purpose of a Robinson projection is to show the curvature of the Earth in respect to the nations, and removing the whitespace makes the map look too close up in respect. So again, I fixed the coding so that there remains a 5px-wide region of free space between the map and the SVG border. This is much smaller to the former 20-25px-wide whitespace. Also in this version, I moved Antigua and Barbuda under France's layer, so that the outline of the island does not block the circle representing France in the region. --NuclearVacuum (talk) 16:42, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

Caribbean Netherlands

After the dissolution of the Netherlands Antilles, the islands remaining under total Dutch control became part of the Caribbean Netherlands. They are not part of the EU, and have officially adopted the US Dollar. Shouldn't these islands gain their own circle, within the Netherlands? This would be like how France and China. --NuclearVacuum (talk) 18:21, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

I agree, this definitely seems to be a job for the sub class circle currently in use for French and Chinese areas (I'll leave this to someone else, haven't had time for work on the map myself lately (and there's a few things I want to implement lately too))--Canuckguy (talk) 03:01, 9 January 2011 (UTC)

I will work on the issue when I have time. But it should be quite easy to do. --NuclearVacuum (talk) 00:34, 13 January 2011 (UTC)

Requests

1. Include SADR.
2. Include consistuent countries of UK on the map for sports.
3. Create circles for unrecognized nations.
4. Add entities for unified RUSSIA-south ossetia-abkhazia-transnistria, ARMENIA-nagorno-karabakh, TURKEY-northern cyprus, ALBANIA-kosovo, MOROCCO-occupied part of western sahara.
5. Add a seperate class for a country with its deppendencies(without circles), for maps showing organizations (e.g. UN, NATO) that recognize dependencies as part of their parent states.
6. Add crown dependencies, gibraltar, saint barthélemy and saint martin(fr.) to .eu, with doing something with circles as coloring .eu with circles will cause DOMs to have a circle, which is not good, as they are member of EU under their parent states. Today if i want to color EU correctly - i must use a construction like this -

.frx,.at,.be,.bg,.cy,.cz,.dk,.ee,.fi,.de,.gr,.hu,.ie,.it,.lv,.lt,.lu,.mt,.pl,.nl,.pt,.ro,.sk,.si,.es,.se,.gb{opacity:1;fill:#003366}/*EU*/
.gf,.mq,.gp,.re,.gi,.gg,.je,.im,.bl,.mf{fill:#003366}/*EU dependencies*/
.xc{fill:#e0e0e0}/*Not EU*/

7. Exclude northern cyprus from cyprus when colouring EU, as EU recognizes northern cyprus, not part of EU.
8. Move the circle for cyprus, because colouring northern cyprus and cyprus seperately in different colors(with circles shown) will cause nearly whole territory of northern cyprus be behind the circle for cyprus.
9. Add norfolk to australia, south georgia and sandwich to falklands and french southern lands to france, as the last two are uninhabited, with the first being de facto integral part of australia.
10. Add a subnational circle to Bonaire, Saba and Sint Eustatius, and exclude them from eu.
11. Add a code like .eu for african union, and south american union, which members are highly integrated within each other as in EU. 12. Show kosovo seperate from serbia as taiwan, western sahara and palestine.
13. Change the size of circles, as the map isn't equal-area - that causes to show circles in different part of globe differently, for example territory of Israel or Djibouti seems a bit smaller than the circles, which could be seen by colouring palestine circle near Israel.
14. I dont know do we need that, but i think to change the size of circle from 20,000 to 10,000 possibly it couldnt be seen al lower zoom levels, but its the microstate standard however.
15. Why there is an opinon that cia doesnt publish worldmappol anymore? There is an 2010 october version in the same reference maps. This creates the 2008 svg version (10mb) completely obsolete, with also creating mistake in documentation where it is written that cia doesnt publish the map anymore.
16. Also if we compare the current blank map with the CIA's version, we could see that the borders of the Caspian and Aral sea are completely obsolete and must be fixed, also two lakes werent included either - lake ladoga and onezhskay.
17. And finally there is a bug in inkscape as somebody say it creates a junk code in svg's - but i'll add that it's creating another problem, opening the svg saved in inkscape with better vector redactors such as coreldraw or adobe illustrator, causes paths to change the color and fly on the screen, with sometimes creating undeletable black boxes and even not opening the map, note that svg's saved in the last two open in inkscape normally - and support layer's which is a great advantage, however in map6 after "deleting junk code" - that problem isnt seen, and all seems good, with all i want to say is that there are thousand's of svg's in wikipedia with that junk code, also if we color the map with css block, and open it in corel, surprise - changes aren't shown.

Let me try and answer several of these for you.

1. The SADR is included (see Western Sahara).
2. This map does not include subdivisions of a nation, so this would not be wise.
3. This request sounds reasonable, there should be circles for the unrecognized nations. We will need to work out how this should be done, but I will look into this.
4. South Ossetia and Abkhazia are recognized by Russia as independent nations, not entities within the Federation. Armenia does not recognize Nagorno-Karbakh, and would obviously not include it. Turkey does not claim Northern Cyprus, Albania does not claim Kosovo, and though Morocco does claim Western Sahara, it is recognized by several nations, and is separate.
5. The UN is an organization, not a nation. Plus the fact that it would pretty much include all the nations on Earth.
6. Gibraltar and Saint Martain are not part of the European Union, and would not be recognized as such.
7. This seems reasonable, but only Turkey recognizes NC, while the EU and the majority of the world recognize Cyprus as a united nation. We should come up with a consensus on the matter.
8. Moving the circle for Cyprus to allow a better view of Northern Cyprus sounds reasonable.
9. Norfolk is to Australia as Puerto Rico is to the US. The SGSSI are not part of the Falklands, and TAAF is not a direct part of France.
10. The BES islands request was already done.
11. The EU is much different from the African Union and the USAN. Plus the EU is the only one of the three to have an ISO code.
12. Kosovo as a separate region seems reasonable. It does have a large enough support to allow it this.
13. The circle sizes are fine the way they are.
14. 20,000 is fine.
15. I have no idea what you are talking about.
16. I think its reasonable to look into adding more lakes.
17. I don't know of any bug.

Those are my opinions. Also (since you keep bringing it up), the European Union is a stronger and more integrated entity, while the African Union and Union of South American Nations are not there yet. The EU has its own currency, government, and has more importance in the world. I don't mean to say that the AU and USAN are bad, but they are not up to being similar to the EU at the present. The other reason the EU was added was because it has its own ISO code, while the AU and the USAN does not. --NuclearVacuum (talk) 17:16, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

To add to NuclearVacuum's comments:

2. It does include subdivisions in a sense, as places like French Guiana and Hong Kong are technically subdivisions of their parent country (hense the different circle tag). There seems to be a lot of requests for the UK states, however I too worry about a "slippery slope".

3. I agree, I thought there were circles for them!

7. I'm against this, I am pretty sure that the EU itself considers the entire island of Cyprus as EU territory (as illustrated on Euro banknotes), that right there is proof that all of Cyprus should be coloured EU.

12. One of the main reasons I've used ISO codes to differentiate between "main" countries" and "unrecognized countries" is to take it out of our hands when drawing the line. Since Kosovo doesn't have an ISO code, again we're going to be entering a slippery slope. I'm convinced it will get a code soon, but having "ISO code" as our benchmark for "recognized or not" (especially considering the coding of the map) gives us a "line in the sand". (BTW, I also agree it should be there, but it fails that test.)

17. I think the bug is inherent in Inkscape, if I'm reading the original request correctly. Part of the reason we should never save edits of this file in Inkscape.

These are my opinions, but, as the one who set up the current system for the map, I felt my views on some of these are necessary. However, since this is a Wiki, others can make any changes they want to it. I may not even like them, but this is a collaborative effort!  :) Canuckguy (talk) 18:15, 15 January 2011 (UTC)

I agree with your "slippery slope". But when it comes to France and China, they are only few of the many subdivisions. Also, how many have requested to have the countries of the UK? This is new to me. --NuclearVacuum (talk) 04:22, 16 January 2011 (UTC)

Southern Sudan

I have created the coding for South Sudan. I am just waiting to see what the results of the referendum show. --NuclearVacuum (talk) 17:19, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

Good, I was waiting for that. I don't see it in there currently, I think that it should be added on the map currently along with the other "unrecognized states" with a x-code. Canuckguy (talk) 18:15, 15 January 2011 (UTC)

Well, I wanted to wait to see what situation comes out. Whether it becomes a Western Sahara situation or a Kosovo situation. I also want to know whether to change Sudan's code to no longer include the south. --NuclearVacuum (talk) 04:15, 16 January 2011 (UTC)

I say for now treat it as a Kosovo, "sd" includes the whole of Sudan, but the Southern Sudan code only includes the southern area. (The only difference I see between Western Sahara's situation and Kosovo's situation is its ISO code status anyways.) Canuckguy (talk) 02:35, 17 January 2011 (UTC)

Okay then ^_^ I just uploaded a new map which includes Southern Sudan within Sudan. I gave it the code xj. --NuclearVacuum (talk) 18:20, 17 January 2011 (UTC)

Circles for unrecognized nations and missing regions of EU

seems bad, there are plenty of issues

1. Circles for unrecognized nations must be at normal (20,000) size.
2. Coloring Azerbaijan with an circle (dont say why i color azerbaijan with circle, i just dont have time to distinguish which country would be coloured with circle and which wont) causes Karabakh to have a circle, the same with EU (see below).
3. I think everyone reading this must look at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special_Member_State_territories_and_the_European_Union - at the end of the page there is a table which first column, application of EU law, obviously shows which entities are a member of EU and which are not, following that i think it's better to exclude NC from EU and add to EU the crown deps. Another thing is that if i color .eu with circles, then a big problem appears - it colors dependencies (as well as NC) with circles, but they aren't members of EU, Reunion isn't individually member of EU, if France goes out of EU, reunion couldn't be able to stay there, it is "member of France" - which is member of EU, i don't know how, but only Malta, Luxembourg and Cyprus must have a circle within EU, but there is a beautifull solution - t o s h o w m e m b e r s o f e u w i t h o u t b o r d e r s, in fact we don't show EU just as an organization, it's very similiar to federation, and the best i think would be to include EU as a seperate hidden layer, colouring which would have to color EU as a single entity without "administrative divisions like France or Germany".
4. Colouring sudan instead colors southern sudan, with colouring sudan being impossible. —Preceding unsigned comment was added by 195.250.88.127 (talk) 11:43, 19 January 2011 (UTC)

Lakes and the Aral Sea

Recently, a request was made to add Lake Ladoga in Russia. I think I can easily add it. I also suggest that we limit the amount of lakes to the top 20. So pretty much, we would be adding Lake Ladoga and Onega in Russia, and maybe Lake Vostok in Antarctica.

Also mentioned was the Aral Sea. As a Soviet historian, I am quite aware of the lake. It was one of the four largest lakes in the world. During the Khrushchev administration, lakes supplying water to the sea were dammed off to supply new projects. Over 50 years, the sea has shrunk from one large lake, to two or three smaller lakes, and now only one small lake that rates in the 30s of largest lakes. I am not too sure what should be done here. Personally, I think we should remove the Aral Sea completely from this map. Most world maps do not add them because of this. The border between Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan is commonly drawn without the lakes. --NuclearVacuum (talk) 20:48, 21 January 2011 (UTC)

Just a quick update. I have updated the code for Russia, so it includes Ladoga and Onega. After doing some more research, those are the only lakes I think that should be added. This is because most of the largest lakes are already added, plus there are several lakes already added which are not too large at all. I will upload the final version soon. Just need to do some quick checks. --NuclearVacuum (talk) 15:38, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

Puerto Rico

Somebody has deleted puerto rico, also mayotte soon will be integrated with france (next month), and the documentation as well as the source code are obsolete (mostly regarding dutch subnational circle and south sudan), an unknown question in the file (whats the pentagram for), different strokes(uninhabited countries have a smaller stroke than other islands, why?) and just a default question - when colouring military alliances or other org's that have only member STATES (no dependencies), for example colouring NATO (should dependencies be coloured with their states, i've seen a lot of NATO maps with both Greenland coloured and uncoloured). —Preceding unsigned comment was added by 195.250.88.127 (talk) 11:30, 9 March 2011‎ (UTC)

Too lazy to do it myself

1. Please focus your eyes on Azerbaijan and Netherands, Azeri stroke is just too thin in the same manner as for islands without borders, despite Azerbaijan having borders, the same for a dutch island bordering belgium in the south, probably there are more incorrect strokes which i haven't noticed.
2. Remember that ISO codes - are just codes, showing kosovo seperate than serbia, caribbean netherlands as three different entities, west bank and gaza strip seperate seems more reasonable.
3. Still need subnational classes for Jan Mayen, SADR with its de facto borders, 4 countries of UK and Svalbard, they are just needed very often.

Some good comments, I will try to address them here:

1. Good eye, thanks for catching that, someone I'm sure will check that out.
2. The whole reason I chose the ISO codes in the first place is so that there is some standard as to what to include - if we include Kosovo separate from Serbia, then do we show N. Cyprus separate from Cyprus? Somaliland separate from Somalia? Baluchistan separate from Pakistan? Quebec separate from Canada? Where is the line drawn? Using the ISO codes at least puts the matter out of our hands and onto a third party. (As to the others, Caribbean Netherlands' islands can always be coloured differently, as each individual island on the whole map has its own code - true they're called something like "path512860" or something like that, but a case could be made for renaming the id of that island "bonaire" or something of the like (Saba and St. Eustatius aren't represented on the map yet) I don't see much of a need for West Bank and Gaza to be coloured differently as they are both still part of "Palestine" (as much as "Palestine" can be defined) but, as I mentioned before, all non contiguous parts do have separate ids, but they have non-descript names, a simple change of id name (while keeping both part of the "ps" tag) would work.)
3. I would suggest that if Jan Mayen and Svalbard be represented somehow, it be given the same class as areas like S. Georgia and FSAAT, ie the tag for areas with no population. The SADR borders I think could be done the same way that areas like Kosovo are done - I have seen a few maps on Wikipedia that do depict that so that is a good idea. I suppose, then, that the UK countries, a not-infrequent request here, can be depicted the same way as Kosovo and other "unrecognized" areas - ie, default is whole of UK, but if a constituent country is required, its tag can be selected.
   

Like you, I too lack the time and motivation (despite being the one who implemented thethings on this map that make it unique) - I could work on it, but it would be quite a while. Perhaps one of the little "elves" that often do updates when I'm not looking like NuclearVacoum or Yug can tackle these? As I pointed out in my reply, several of these are very easy to do with the ideas I came up with. --Canuckguy (talk) 16:31, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

Bad geography knowledge, Svalbard has 10,000 population.

A

1. No Puerto Rico, i've said about that before, but i don't know why i'm ignored, is it that difficult to notice that.
2. The circles must be on by default, 95% of the maps show international organizations and various international rankings, and there isn't any reason behind hiding circles.
3. Lots of islands which stroke covers all the fill, and even some countries in the caribbean which are fully invisible (e.g. both st. martins and their neighbours), i think their stroke must be set to 0, in the style of unpopulated countries.
4. I agree that ISO codes are "line in the sand", and i also consider that it's a discrimination for showing only .tf and .gs from unpopulated countries because of their size, i've categorize the unincluded territories into 3 categories, first category is represented in the october 2010 edition of political_world.pdf by a dot or only by a line: Christmas Island, Cocos (Keeling) Islands and United States Minor Outlying Islands, second category includes territories that are in cia map but are excluded in bmw6: Bouvet Island, British Indian Ocean Territory and Heard Island and McDonald Islands, the last category countries are on the map and are subnational (in this case a respective class must be used): Åland Islands and Svalbard and Jan Mayen.
5. When editing paths on the map with inkscape, sometimes there are two dots on the same position (and deleting one of them damages the path), when i path --> union it everithing becomes normal
6. What about changing the stroke style from miter to round
7. Have you ever tried to path --> union several countries together, lots of nodes between them appear, can somebody fix it, i think that a full day must be spent on that work )
8. I become mad when i see the Aral sea.

—Preceding unsigned comment was added by 195.250.88.127 (talk) 11:04, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

Countries included

Sovereign States: Taiwan is usually considered to be part of China, unrecognized class is better for Taiwan (with also the fact that it has roughly 1/3 recognition compared to Kosovo).

Some countries aren't included:

Dependent Territories: Christmas Island, Cocos (Keeling) Islands, Ashmore and Cartier Islands, Coral Sea Islands, Heard Island and McDonald Islands, Clipperton Island, Bouvet Island, British Indian Ocean Territory, Akrotiri and Dhekelia, Baker Island, Howland Island, Jarvis Island, Johnston Atoll, Kingman Reef, Midway Island, Navassa Island, Wake Island, 17 in total.

Subnational Entities: Northern Ireland, Scotland, Wales, Palmyra Atoll, Jan Mayen, Svalbard, Åland, Gaza Strip, 8 together. With BES islands being removed, and adding seperate classes for Bonaire, Saba and Saint Eustatius each.

I'l also add that the hole in the Netherlands isn't a lake, it's actually an island, the lake is a bit north ;)

How about to change the width of the file to 1500px.

And NuclearVacuum, you are using "(minor fix)es" a way too much, in a file like this there couldn't be any "minor fixes", i think you will agree that for example fixing southern sudan isn't a minor fix. —Preceding unsigned comment was added by 195.250.88.127 (talk) 09:33, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

Current map is inaccurate

I understand that maps through the 1960s, 1970s, and 1980s had a skew whereby the northern region was expanded and the equatorial and southern regions were scrunched, but this map is just as guilty of expanding the equatorial region, and scrunching the northern and southern regions! Why are we using this map instead of an accurate one?

There are many, many maps in Wikipedia's commons that show the world non-skewed, and there are even composite photo maps that show a skew from the Earth's curvature, but it's nowhere *near* as severe as the one currently being used.

Here is one of the most accurate maps I've seen on Wikipedia in terms of proper ratios, but even it scrunches the north and south: File:Map_projection-Eckert_IV.png

This is a composite view showing how badly skewed the current map is: File:Winkel-tripel-projection.jpg

This map isn't copyright-free, but it seems to show the proper proportions: http://studentweb.cencol.ca/wtsang15/COMP%20213/Midterm/midterm213.htm

Essentially, the current map seems to be the result of the backlash of political correctness in the 1990s. "The older maps diminished the equatorial region? Well, then, let's switch that around, shall we?" It's ridiculous, inaccurate, and outdated. Please, can we change this?— Preceding unsigned comment added by DeeJaye6 (talk • contribs) 17:16, 28 May 2011 (UTC)

No, you are incorrect, first the North isn't diminished, the North Pole which is just a dot is represented in the Robinson projection at 3/4 of the ecuator, and also, it's impossible to make map of another projection from this one, the map is delivered from cia world factbook reference map, and there isn't a map of that quality on the net, it's the best what we have (but Winkel Tripel projection is still much better)—Preceding unsigned comment was added by 195.250.88.127 (talk) 05:43, 8 June 2011‎ (UTC)

Cleaning the map

Why so much nodes in the ocean path. And some nodes in the corner even add unneeded curves, also in the bottom left the antarctic and ocean borders don't even match. And it'll be good to find some solution about the two Aleutian islands which strokes collide with the ocean border (and the northern one of two actually belongs to Russia, and it's not even an island, just the easternmost tip of Eurasia which goes after 175W), furthermore all of the Aegean islands are grouped with greece, but one of them belongs to Turkey (see the cia's political world reference map), i'm completely sure that there are a lot of other incorrect groupings, another issue are unrecognized countries stroke, as well as their circles which must be handled at the same way as in the other countries especially when colour (e.g. data) for the unrecognized country is the same as in the country which internationally they are recognized part of, another idea is the removal of all small islands (especially for islands which stroke is wider than their fill, and islands of countries such as Indonesia, Canada, US and others which mainland size is 1000 times bigger than their outlying islands, and which inclusion mades the map even more messy, Chile has 155 paths! when 20 would be even more than enough for that country, plus the file size - plain.svgz saved with inkscape with vacuum defs, named colours, inline attributes and some other things weights only 450kb. Changing circles for small countries from paths to clones would additionally reduce file size. Inkscape is simple as MS Paint and weights only 30MB and could be downloaded even using dial-up, it's silly that someone would edit the file using text editor, also note that starting from winter 2009 only 3 people have made more than 1 edit on this map, i've got a lot of ideas about improving the map but the fact that i have to edit it without inkscape completely kills my motivation.

The main reason Inkscape is frowned upon is because it adds a bunch of extra code to the file - I would think someone who is concerned about the size of the map would be concerned about a program adding extra code too! I personally use Inkscape for my SVG work, beingonly a beginner, but I don't save it in Inkscape, I copy the pertinent code it generates to the text file and save that; one can still use Inkscape, as long as one doesn't save the file with that program.--Canuckguy (talk) 17:05, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

When you save it to plain svg (instead of inkscape svg), it results in lesser file size, i suppose that the code becomes more cleaner. Editing the file with inkscape gives many advantages, editing the file manually is just useless.

I wouldn't say completely useless, copying the code helps me learn about SVG, rather than just having the program do it. Had I not learned SVG, I wouldn't have made the improvements to the map that make it what it is. So there's that.  :) But to each his own. I don't know enough about Inkscape to know if "plain SVG' save will do that - why don't you load the file to your hard disk, save it once as plain SVG and once as Inkscape SVG (don't make any changes to it), and compare the file sizes of those two saves against the "control", see if they are bigger or not. If plain SVG is the same size, then I see no problem with doing it that way, personally. --Canuckguy (talk) 15:15, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

Both are smaller, Inkscape svg saves additional information such as window size or zoom level.

some tips to reduce svg size in inkscape: file-vacuum defs, in inkscape preferences-windows please check - dont save windows geometry, in inkscape preferences-svg output please check - use named colours, inline attributes, indent spaces(0), allow relative coordinates and uncheck - force repeat commands

If you save it with Inkscape (plain-svg) then it removes all of the rich class structure that has been included. Essentially making the image useless for automatic generation of maps etc. of course you can use inkscape to fix paths etc but as Canuckguy suggests you should then simply use the path code (from xml-editor in Inkscape) and past it into the relevant section in the svg file opened by a simple text editor. The stress on simple here is to avoid editors which add hidden formatting to the file. Since most/all the paths are id tagged it should't be to hard to find the corresponding path in the text file.

As for using clones for the circles. the problem with this is attribute inheritance i.e. if you make a derivative where you want to colour one circle but not another then you would have to de-link the clone in order to give them different colours. this once again prevents you from easily making derivative images.

The reason why this (and the use of classes) is so stressed is that it allows maps such as this to be created simply by adding the following code to the svg file.

.fi, .vn, .cl, .rs, .ng, .zw, .ke {fill: #b3b3b3;} /* no data (motor vehicles) */
.ua, .si, .ma, .by, .ec {fill: #ffff80;} /* 10000-49999 (motor vehicles) */
.ro, .ph, .nl, .uz, .eg, .co {fill: #ccff80;} /* 50000-99999 (motor vehicles) */
.th, .tr, .ir, .cz, .sk, .ar, .za, .id, .my, .se, .au, .hu, .tw, .at, .pt, .ve, .pk {fill: #80ff80;} /* 100000-499999 (motor vehicles) */
.in, .pl {fill: #aad5ff;} /* 500000-999999 (motor vehicles) */
.cn, .br, .ca, .mx, .gb, .ru, .it, .be {fill: #0080ff;} /* 1000000-2999999 (motor vehicles) */
.kr, .fr, .es {fill: #0000ff;} /* 3000000-4999999 (motor vehicles) */
.de {fill: #0000ae;} /* 5000000-99999999 (motor vehicles) */
.jp, .us {fill: #000080;} /* more then 10000000 (motor vehicles) */

And it allows sets like this to be (semi)auto-generated from datasets. Now I'll admit that a lot of the maps generated from this one will simply be done in inkscape thus eliminating the usefulness of the classes BUT whereas doing that with this map is possible doing the opposite with an inkscaped map would not be possible. /Lokal_Profil 15:26, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

An aside. There are other save modes in Inkscape which would preserve the class structure (or at least parts thereof) but these, as mentioned, all add junk code to the file. All of the filesize saving that you do by saving the current file in plain-svg is essentially usefull data which is deleted. /Lokal_Profil 15:29, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

Projection ?

In the documentation,I don't see the exact projection of the map. Someone know ? Yug (talk) 15:46, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

The description of the file reads: A detailed Robinson projection SVG map with grouping enabled to connect all non-contiguous parts of a country's territory for easy colouring. Smaller countries can also be represented by larger circles to show their data easier. A thorough description of use and other instructions relating to can be found on the instruction page--Canuckguy (talk) 20:16, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

Latest upload

I tried to address some of the issues that User:195.250.88.127 (I would highly recommend you get an account here!) raised in recent discussion in this update:

• I restored Puerto Rico, it seems to have gone missing a while ago, don't know who did it either ...
• I renamed the id tags of West Bank and Gaza Strip as west_bank and gaza_strip respectively (from their old tags of path 5474 and path5472 respectively). This could come in useful and we could rename several other areas that are just represented as path tags currently.

I tried to change the stroke width on Georgia and Azerbaijan, but had difficulty in doing so, I think the unrecognized areas in these countries are hindering that. (For an example, take a look at Somalia's coast, the eastern coast is normal, but most of the northern coast (ie that of Somaliland) is small. I'm not sure how to fix this, perhaps someone else can?) I would also like to see the SADR-administered Western Sahara be selectable, as well as the UK countries, as there seem to be maps that call for that - essentially just using the same trick that we do for the unrecognized areas. I don't have the SVG ability to create areas though, so I leave that to others. --Canuckguy (talk) 15:33, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

Version shown at top of file main page

Strange, the updated file shows South Sudan, but not the picture at the top of the page of article for this picture. Why is this? --Canuckguy (talk) 16:34, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

Animation

Has somebody already tried to animate this World map, so that it can be used to show historical data, too? I do not know enough about svg animation to start right now, but I would be interested in seeing this. – Kalkühl (talk) 10:26, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

Questions about the SVG code

Moved here from File talk:BlankMap-World-Microstates.svg Lokal_Profil 10:14, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

I have been using this map as a template for another map and some things in the SVG-code confuse me.

Why do all the paths have an id?

E.g. id="path2446". It doesn't seem useful.

Inkscape (and probably other editors) automatically adds an id to any path which is created. Although the file is largely worked on in a text editor the paths will normally be done in inkscape and the code then copied across, together with the id.

As for usefulness it still serves a purpose since it gives a unique reference which can be used in any discussion of the code. /Lokal_Profil 10:10, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

Why is opacity=0 used?

Wouldn't display=none be more logical, as well as easier for the renderer?

Why is all the "circles" coded in what seem to be a hard to modify, error-prone, slow to render and file size increasing manner?

E.g:

 <circle class="circlexx subxx fr gp eu" cx="809.38892" cy="615.23084" id="gp_" r="4.2338"/>
 <circle class="circlexx subxx fr mq eu" cx="813.59498" cy="635.36891" id="mq_" r="4.2338"/>
 <circle class="circlexx subxx fr re eu" cx="1688.1991" cy="941.7735" id="re_" r="4.2338"/>
 <circle class="circlexx subxx fr yt eu" cx="1614.6058" cy="872.183025" id="yt." r="4.2338"/>
 

could perhaps be be replaced with

 <defs>
     <circle id="circle" r="4.2338" />
     <use id="french_DOM" xlink:href="#circle"  class="circlexx subxx fr eu" />
 </defs>
 <use xlink:href="#french_DOM" class="gp" cx="809.38892" cy="615.23084" id="gp_" />
 <use xlink:href="#french_DOM" class="mq" cx="813.59498" cy="635.36891" id="mq_" />
 <use xlink:href="#french_DOM" class="re" cx="1688.1991" cy="941.7735" id="re_" />
 <use xlink:href="#french_DOM" class="yt" cx="1614.6058" cy="872.183025" id="yt." />
 

I don't know about this but one problem with using clones is that things like colour inheritance doesn't always work as expected. i.e. if you give the original and the clone different colours I've seen different svg renderers either use the original colour for both or allow each to have different colours. Whether this might still be am issue or not for the above code I cannot say. /Lokal_Profil 10:10, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

Is the transforms artifacts from a vektor editor?

Are there any good reason that they are used?

 <circle class="unxx ge xa" cx="2118.7195" cy="569.46204" id="xa_" r="4.2338" transform="translate(-557.347, -180.272)"/>
 <circle class="unxx ge xo" cx="2118.7195" cy="569.46204" id="xo_" r="4.2338" transform="translate(-535.12, -173.631)"/>
 <circle class="unxx rs xk" cx="2118.7195" cy="569.46204" id="xk_" r="4.2338" transform="translate(-695.594, -179.907)"/>
 <circle class="unxx rs xk" cx="2118.7195" cy="569.46204" id="xk_" r="4.2338" transform="translate(-695.594, -179.907)"/>
 

I have now removed/fixed these and any other transformed circles. /Lokal_Profil 10:10, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

Why do some circles have a different radius?

Larger population? Larger area? It isn't documented anywhere.

 <circle class="circlexx me" cx="1410.6593" cy="390.19957" id="me." r="6.01303"/>
 <circle class="circlexx lb" cx="1533.8287" cy="465.99617" id="lb." r="6.01303"/>
 <circle class="circlexx sz" cx="1379.9952" cy="450.23166" r="6.01303" transform="translate(126.802, 539.174)" id="sz."/>
 <circle class="circlexx nc" cx="2512.6679" cy="942.855655" id="nc." r="6.01303"/>
 

It's explained in File_talk:BlankMap-World6.svg#Small_countries. In short the smaler circles are for the French DOMs and the Chinese SARs so as to distinguish them from sovereign (small) nations. /Lokal_Profil 10:10, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

The examples given (me, lb, sz, and nc) though, are, or should be, all the same type of circle (sovereign nations and dependencies). None of those are a DOM or SAR.--Canuckguy (talk) 04:28, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

I think the idea was to compare them to the code in the section above which are for French DOMs. /Lokal_Profil 15:15, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

Why is the ocean code so huge?

I'm no expert on map projections, but couldn't it be replaced with just a short snippet of code?

 <path class="oceanxx" d="M 2079.5058,1457.5605 L 615.24779,1457.5605 C 615.13079,1457.5605
 615.07079,1457.5535 614.95179,1457.5215 C 611.67679,1456.6515 608.40179,1455.7815
 605.12779,1454.9105 C 599.15079,1453.3225 593.22879,1451.5225 587.30779,1449.7385 C 
 564.39379,1442.8315 541.76579,1434.6995 519.46979,1426.0115 C 495.81079,1416.7935
 472.34979,1407.0946 449.19179,1396.6816 C 426.78379,1386.6056 405.17679,1375.0536
 383.76379,1363.0356 C 363.11779,1351.4496 343.01079,1338.8296 323.37979,1325.5996 C
 302.29179,1311.3876 281.47879,1296.8506 261.05379,1281.7006 C 242.35079,1267.8276
 223.73679,1253.6306 206.05279,1238.4686 C 186.98679,1222.1216 167.82379,1205.7706
 150.35279,1187.6906 C 132.97779,1169.7106 116.33279,1151.0606 100.15679,1131.9976 C
 84.352777,1113.3736 70.086776,1093.4716 56.901786,1072.9246 C 44.046786,1052.8916
 32.093776,1032.1356 22.469776,1010.3426 C 17.516776,999.12756 12.408776,987.76556
 8.7017761,976.06056 C 5.0657761,964.58166 1.5997761,953.04259 -1.5932239,941.43054 C
 -8.0102239,918.09356 -14.055224,894.78356 -18.234224,870.92056 C -22.491222,846.60856
 -24.894222,822.19856 -26.943222,797.62156 C -28.947222,773.58556 -28.829222,749.40156
 -27.225222,725.34856 C -25.648222,701.69856 -23.363222,677.92456 -19.274222,654.56456 C
 -15.018224,630.25156 -9.3842239,606.45156 -2.8412239,582.66156 C 3.5687761,559.35256
 10.483776,536.34856 20.265776,514.19856 C 30.320776,491.42956 42.318786,469.90956
 55.502786,448.81656 C 68.512776,428.00356 83.108777,408.26756 98.686787,389.31756 C
 113.73479,371.01156 129.68979,353.25256 146.15179,336.20856 C 163.77479,317.96256
 182.64579,301.14556 201.89579,284.64756 C 220.33379,268.84456 239.55379,253.98456
 258.95979,239.39656 C 278.42779,224.76056 298.39379,210.83356 318.55579,197.17556 C
 339.26979,183.14456 360.47879,169.92056 382.15079,157.42556 C 403.46579,145.13656
 425.31479,133.98856 447.60479,123.59356 C 469.58579,113.34356 492.14979,104.17656
 514.74579,95.375565 C 537.44879,86.532565 560.37879,78.195565 583.63479,70.914565 C
 589.69379,69.017565 595.80079,67.276565 601.90879,65.549565 C 604.63079,64.779565
 607.36079,64.045565 610.09479,63.318565 C 611.59979,62.918565 613.56579,61.986565
 615.13379,61.986565 L 2079.9638,61.986565 C 2079.9798,61.986565 2079.9958,61.986565
 2080.0118,61.986565 C 2079.8448,61.986565 2079.6788,61.986565 2079.5118,61.986565 C
 2102.8268,68.191565 2125.8778,75.323565 2148.5448,83.611565 C 2171.6378,92.054565
 2194.6158,100.87956 2217.2348,110.52956 C 2240.5208,120.46556 2263.4848,130.95256
 2285.8828,142.76456 C 2306.9808,153.89056 2327.8178,165.78556 2347.8608,178.72156 C
 2368.9418,192.32656 2389.7498,206.29256 2410.2218,220.80056 C 2429.7368,234.62956
 2448.9938,248.98756 2467.6208,263.99256 C 2486.8818,279.50856 2506.0408,295.30556
 2524.0538,312.27356 C 2541.8708,329.05756 2558.7508,346.67256 2574.9408,365.03656 C
 2591.2478,383.53256 2607.1478,402.30656 2621.4508,422.41856 C 2635.3488,441.96256
 2648.4468,462.42756 2659.5898,483.67756 C 2671.1238,505.67356 2681.1048,528.35656
 2688.6188,552.05056 C 2692.2518,563.50656 2695.3368,575.14756 2698.5608,586.72256 C
 2701.7738,598.25356 2704.9238,609.81956 2707.4578,621.52456 C 2712.6258,645.40556
 2716.6718,669.47856 2719.1178,693.79656 C 2721.5718,718.19256 2723.1798,742.56356
 2722.9808,767.09056 C 2722.7908,790.65456 2720.6908,814.43756 2717.7688,837.81156 C
 2714.7368,862.07056 2710.5198,886.16156 2704.6398,909.90056 C 2701.6808,921.84356
 2698.3948,933.69556 2695.0378,945.53154 C 2691.7468,957.13466 2688.5558,968.83466
 2684.3988,980.16156 C 2676.0918,1002.8036 2666.1688,1024.8836 2654.1338,1045.8046 C
 2641.9958,1066.9066 2628.8498,1087.4866 2614.2378,1106.9696 C 2599.1658,1127.0666
 2582.6678,1145.9446 2565.8948,1164.6296 C 2549.8298,1182.5266 2532.8918,1199.7316
 2514.8648,1215.6616 C 2496.0788,1232.2646 2476.8978,1248.3126 2457.1558,1263.7656 C
 2438.2988,1278.5276 2418.9668,1292.7306 2399.3188,1306.4206 C 2378.7018,1320.7866
 2357.7538,1334.6106 2336.4758,1347.9776 C 2326.4088,1354.3016 2316.0058,1360.1326
 2305.6418,1365.9516 C 2295.0348,1371.9086 2284.3858,1378.0166 2273.4448,1383.3436 C
 2250.7338,1394.3986 2227.7768,1404.7266 2204.3888,1414.2665 C 2181.7848,1423.4875
 2159.0678,1432.2695 2136.0228,1440.3345 C 2117.4118,1446.8465 2098.5568,1452.4975
 2079.5058,1457.5605" id="ocean"/>
 

The ocean sort of contains the data used to convert an equirectangular projection into the Robinson projection. You could achieve a similar looking shapes with less nodes, but it wouldn't be an exact Robinson projection.

Why haven't anyone deleted the "pentagram artifact" from Sodipodi (or is it Inkscape)?

It's almost the first thing you see in the code.

--Se mj (talk) 07:26, 29 July 2011 (UTC)

Since this map is simply a semi-automatic derivative of File:BlankMap-World6.svg these questions should be asked at File_talk:BlankMap-World6.svg instead. I did however resolve the circle transforms and remove the pentagram (think it may have been used for capitals at some point). /Lokal_Profil 18:05, 30 July 2011 (UTC)

Even if it was less annoying then Inkscape, I recall that Sodipodi sprinkled some definitions over SVG files it created, even when they where not in use. Since Inkscape don't (or at least don't do that now, I have never seen "use" and "defs" used in any file created by InkScape), I just assumed it was from Sodipodi, or an early version of InksScape.

A newbie question, what is the appropriate method of transferring these questions to File_talk:BlankMap-World6.svg, do I delete them here and copy them to that page or do I make a reference to this page, or is there another method? And that "talk" page reads like a lot of announcements, not like a place to ask questions, even if there are a few at the bottom (one actually asking about the huge chunk of code for the ocean, but I guess it couldn't hurt to ask the same question twice, since no one replied him ;-). --Se mj (talk) 21:33, 30 July 2011 (UTC)

Just out of curiosity, why was the transforms there in the first place?--Se mj (talk) 21:43, 30 July 2011 (UTC)

I added some more answers above. The transforms are there because when shifting circles about in inkscape it takes the code fore the circle to be where you first place it. Any subsequent movements are treated as a transform rather than by updating the coordinates (as is the case for e.g. paths). Inkscape will also add things to the definitions which it later fails to delete. The pentagram probably stems from some such murky past.

As for asking at File_talk:BlankMap-World6.svg I'd either just leave a note about this there or (probably better) copy the whole thing across (incl. these comments) with ::''Moved here from [[File talk:BlankMap-World-Microstates.svg]]'' under the title. /Lokal_Profil 10:10, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

South Sudan

Just a note that it seems to be confirmed that South Sudan's ISO code is SS. It looks like I'll be way too busy in the foreseeable future to change it, if someone can make that simple update? --Canuckguy (talk) 04:45, 24 August 2011 (UTC)

Notice

Professionally, it's not recommended to re-use or produce:

• any map that the tool Gunnmap produces
• any derivitive work of File:BlankMap-World6.svg that loses the earth's elliptical outline (e.g. File:BlankMap-World6, compact.svg, File:TaiwanVisaFree.svg), or simply does some cut-off work (e.g. File:Armenia Japan Locator.svg, File:Extended Central America.svg)

They're robinson projection maps but lose their outline, making it hard to recognize the projection type for readers. A reader would generally consider them as cylindrical projections, so that the shapes of the continents are wrong. And because of that, any derivitive work (especially the cut-off work) that uses these maps without flattening them, is also wrong, they may be with a very weird projection. Most of those blank maps are in the public domain and the attribution is not obligatory, thus their derivitive works could easily lose the information about their original projection type.

Those are also not professionally recommended:

• any SVG script's output as a rectangular world map, that are only horizontally flattened from File:BlankMap-World6.svg (e.g. File:BlankMap-FlatWorld6.svg, File:BlankMap-World-162E-flat.svg)

They are only horizontally flattened (or not properly vertically flattened) from File:BlankMap-World6.svg, they're not with a known map projection (be aware of that they're not with equirectangular projection since robinson projection uses interpolation, see: Robinson projection#Specification). However, they may be "better" than File:BlankMap-World6, compact.svg or which Gunnmap produces.

For a statistical world map, it's ideal to use cylindrical projections, especially equirectangular projection and miller cylindrical projection. If the Robinson projection is used, ideally, the map must be along with the earth's elliptical outline.

When making a regional map, consider using properly centered map with proper projection rather than this one.

---

--Tomchen1989 (talk)

(Moved this here from the documentation to discussion, so we can discuss first before implementing. Personally, I think this is just a minor issue and have seen maps that use the same base that Tomchen recommends against used in published atlases (I believe they were listed as a "modified Robinson projection" or something like that).)--Canuckguy (talk) 14:14, 9 October 2011 (UTC)

I think even a minor issue can be mentioned in the documentation, if it may help derivitive works to get even a little better and more profesional, why not let it present in the doc? The doc is not the main page of en wiki, not even a policy or something.

And it is just a professional recommendation or advice, not a policy, not a must-do, users are not forbidden to use or produce unrecommended maps. If someone's using them unseriously and ordinarily, of course he uses as he wish.

Personally, I also feel they're not minor issues (at least mid ones), you can find plenty of maps that have such issues, from which derived more maps that also with these issues. Don't underestimate them.

A serious, profesional published book would never accept File:GM - Countries by Internet Users.png nor File:Armenia Japan Locator.svg, not because their data or color but the projection, that misleads readers. A map with Robinson projection should be always with the earth's outline, to represent it's with Robinson projection. A regional map would look askew if not using properly centered map with proper projection. I have precisely described my reasons and advices in my previous post above, please read seriously. --Tomchen1989 (talk) 15:11, 9 October 2011 (UTC)

See File talk:BlankMap-FlatWorld6.svg, someone asked if it is with mercator projection and another guy answered equirectangular projection. No, none of them is correct. If you just let it go, let them make derivitive works without caring the projection issue, it will mislead more and more people. --Tomchen1989 (talk) 15:27, 9 October 2011 (UTC)

Actually, the ideal world map to be used and adapted from is with equirectangular projection. See English article, it is the de-facto standard for computer applications that process global maps. But since this map seems highly based on the CIA's robinson projection political world map, we can hardly change that. --Tomchen1989 (talk) 15:37, 9 October 2011 (UTC)

The 'documentation' (unique to this file, I think, though I haven't seen probably 1/10 of 1% of Wikimedia's content) is mainly meant to help people who are creating files with the map (as the file is meant to, the "discussion" used for discussing changes to the file (like you are suggesting) - in fact the "instructions for use" were originally the first things on the talk page of the file until someone created the "Discussion" page for them.

Personally my recommendation would be that if you feel something is wrong about this (or any other map), like the projection not showing the Earth's curvature, or a regional map using the "wrong" projection, instead of recommending people not do it, I would suggest make a copy yourself (or, if you can't, next best thing would be to ask those with the skills to make it "properly") instead of telling people not to use this. Because then, if we are left with your notice, we are bereft of an alternative to use instead. I don't see any objection from you (unless I'm misreading your post) about using this map for world maps that require all 7 continents on it, but if you want maps for other uses, why not have them created, either by yourself or someone with the skills, and link them to this map (probably in the gallery section).

Oh, and, finally, all projections mislead, that's inherent in putting an (essentially) spherical surface on a 2-D object. That's why there's many different projections. This file does have the words "Robinson projection" right there on the file page, so that is not misleading in the least. If the other pages don't have "Robinson projection" (or, in the case of the 6-continent map, "modified Robinson projection" (which is essentially what it is), putting it there in the description like it is on here should reduce incidences of misleading.--Canuckguy (talk) 22:45, 16 October 2011 (UTC)

The best we've got?!?

Hey guys, your work is terrific, but the map is somewhat inaccurate on the small scale, e.g. Denmarks border is missing a lot of detail, which you recognize immediately if you zoom in to a scale, where - let's say - Germany fits on your screen. It was my understanding that it's "the best we've got", the most accurate map on the internet that's free to use for everyone. But what about this? You can download lots of data from that page and with the particular link I gave you, you can view the map data to see who friggin' accurate the data is. Has nobody found that before? Or am I messing up some license stuff? 79.224.77.6 21:40, 11 December 2011 (UTC)

Personally (as one of the people responsible for this map) I do sincerely believe it's "the best we got" ... for maps of the entire world showing data applicable for the whole planet. If people try to zoom in to use it as a small scale map, it's really going beyond its scope. It can be more refined, but then, of course, the file size goes up. If one were to make a map from this where, say, Germany fits on your screen, it'd be better to just make a separate, detailed map of Germany instead, since (as I pointed out) this is BlankMap-*World*6, meant as a map of the entire *world*. --Canuckguy (talk) 00:21, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

Well, the file size is of course an argument. Haven't thought of that. I was just amazed how detailed that freely available map is.

By the way have you taken a look at my post on your talk page? 79.224.77.6 10:46, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

Yes, but didn't reply, as none was necessary. Thanks for the heads up though. Also had a look at the Natural Earth map you linked to and was impressed as well, but there didn't seem to be a way to actually use the map (ie select and colour countries). --Canuckguy (talk) 13:20, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

But you can download the data on the site and convert it to SVG. That's the point. 79.224.77.6 18:45, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

Being a beginner at SVG (coupled with having zero free time lately), this is not a task for me. But if you (or someone else) wants to try it, and see how it comes out (especially file-size wise), then by all means give it a go! It'd be a nice idea to explore, and see if it can be done officially ... --Canuckguy (talk) 00:11, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

I finally took the time and converted it: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:BlankMap-Equirectangular.svg I also finally made myself an account, so I could upload it. Take a look on the Discussion Page to see how it's done. When you zoom far in, you can see the difference to this map. The grade of detail is roughly the same: edgier, but with less vector artefacts. Anyway: It's totally awesome what you can do with Natural Earth and GMT. Yeah! --Illuminatus235 (talk) 16:59, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

Gradient map maker

Seems that Gunn Map is down, no surprise, but disappointing. Is there anywhere else one can go to make gradient SVG maps using this map? I've had the idea for one for a while but, as I've said before, my SVG skills aren't good enough to do it myself, one like his was just what I needed.--Canuckguy (talk) 22:39, 14 April 2012 (UTC)

nugsl-worldmap

nugsl-worldmap doesn't seem to be working with the current version of the map :( Hellerick (talk) 04:09, 23 June 2012 (UTC)

How to update the file?

I have created a better version of the file. Cleansed from inkscape crap and better compatible with nugsl-worldmap script. How do I update the file? -- Konstantin Burov 12:01 PM, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

Hi 180.183.37.144, you have to create an account. Given the high use of the file, it's perhaps better to test upload it to File:Test.svg and then, please follow Commons:Overwriting existing files. -- Rillke^(q?) 13:22, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

Hi Rillke I have an account but all the files I look at say that I cannot override them. I've tried to use this link but the file still didn't appear on the page. The fixed version of the file is available here. I've also fixed the nugsl-worldmap script so it now works with the fixed version of the map. The fixed version of the script is available here.

 Done Done, I made it using your online file and the upload link I previously provided to you, it went very smoothly, as expected. Note: is the file semi-protected ? any idea about what forbidden Konstantin to upload his file ? Yug (talk) 17:16, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

Think you need to have belong to the "autoconfirmed" group before you are allowed to overwrite existing files. This essentially means that you can't use a brand new account for these types of edits. /Lokal_Profil 18:15, 12 April 2013 (UTC)

Bahrain

Why is Bahrain white so you can't see it? Shouldn't it be gray? And the same with the Gaza Strip.

I just checked and both are there coloured grey - they are tiny, but they are both definitely there. --Canuckguy (talk) 04:36, 16 February 2013 (UTC)

Maldives

Where's Maldives on this map?

It is there too, but it is even tinier than Bahrain and the Gaza Strip. (The islands in the Maldives themselves are tiny, just one very tiny island shows on the map.) This is why small countries, like Bahrain and the Maldives, have the circle class (and should be used more often on Wikipedia and Wikimedia maps imho) so that these very small countries can be seen.--Canuckguy (talk) 00:42, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

Country names

Is it worth our adding <title> elements to each group or path? These country names would be displayed (in most browsers) when hovered over. Are there any downsides to making such a change? U+003F^?

I for one approve such an initiative! If someone wanted to do this, I say go right ahead! --Canuckguy (talk) 14:20, 12 May 2013 (UTC)

OK done. U+003F^? 20:24, 18 May 2013 (UTC)

Subpath classes

France, for example, is defined as

<g class="landxx coastxx fr frx eu" id="frx">
 <path d="..." id="path2166" />
 <path d="..." id="path2168" />
 <path d="..." id="path2172" />
 <path d="..." id="path2174" />
 <path class="landxx fr frx eu" d="..." id="path2182" />
 <path d="..." id="path2184" />
</g>

Is there any reason for redefinition of the landxx and other classes within this subpath, here and in many other places? Is it meant to represent "mainland"? It leads to unexpected behaviour in the couple of browsers I checked; hovering over mainland France highlights Corsica, whilst hovering over Corsica does not highlight France. Unless there is a good reason, I would propose removal of such classes. U+003F^? 07:21, 1 June 2013 (UTC)

The land class is used for places with a mainland border, which means that path 2182 would be mainland France, but Corsica does not have a class. The "mainland border" class is needed so that the border is a little more visible and the coastlines are a little more subtle. You may get a better idea of it if you look at the British Isles, the coast of Ireland is thicker because there is a land border on it, whereas the coast of Great Britain isn't because there is no land border there.

If you want, you can fool around with it until you find a border witdth that is suitable for both islands with no borders and mainland nations with them.--Canuckguy (talk) 14:00, 1 June 2013 (UTC)--50.72.114.34 13:59, 1 June 2013 (UTC)

No Corsica does inherit landxx from the parent group. If you add

.landxx:hover {fill: #de855e}

to the start of the map, you'll see that hovering over Corsica does highlight it. Hovering over mainlaind France highlights both that and Corsica, which is the unexpected (to me) behaviour. If we want landxx to just mean mainland, we'll have to remove it from the group. U+003F^? 07:26, 2 June 2013 (UTC)

... so I guess the correct code here would be

<g class="coastxx fr frx eu" id="frx">
 <path d="..." id="path2166" />
 <path d="..." id="path2168" />
 <path d="..." id="path2172" />
 <path d="..." id="path2174" />
 <path class="landxx" d="..." id="path2182" />
 <path d="..." id="path2184" />
</g>

? U+003F^? 07:38, 2 June 2013 (UTC)

It seems that more important things are now broken, for instance coloring France with .fr {fill: #ff0000;} does not work anymore and coloring the EU only colors half of it. I’m reverting to the previous version for now (which is not broken). Fractal (talk) 19:14, 6 August 2013 (UTC)

Latest revert: Kosovo and Crimea

I reverted it back since I noticed there were SVG errors (seems like they were brought from importing an Inkscape image without cleaning it up) and noticed a few other revisions too that are against the spirit of the map. Firstly, Kosovo. While 52% of nations, as well as myself and probably a majority of Wikipedians too regard Kosovo as separate (and I agree with that, as I mentioned), the map has to use a neutral source to determine what is a country and what isn't, said neutral source is the en:ISO 3166-1 country code list, on which Kosovo does not yet (officially) appear. With 52% of countries (and myself) behind it, I hope it's just a matter of time before it does get on the list (after all, Taiwan and Western Sahara are, and neither of them are recognized UN countries), but for now there has to be an impartial list to go to to refer to when we want to add a country, otherwise, there's no standard to follow. (If we went by "majority of countries", then we'd have to remove Taiwan (and, I think, W. Sahara too).) Keep in mind Kosovo is easily selectable by its code. The other thing is Crimea - not sure exactly what was done there (just saw the edit summary with "Crimea", and there doesn't seem to be a standard to go by on that that we can use. In other cases (such as the complicated territorial claims between India, Pakistan, and China in the Kashmir area) I've bgone by actual administrative control - to whit I guess the best watt o indicate that is Russia, although Russian control in the area isn't as widely recognized as actual Chinese control in the Aksai Chin area is. So, lacking an impartial list of territorial control areas (like we have for countries), what should be done with Crimea?--Canuckguy (talk) 14:28, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

The current practise on this map, shown by Sudan-Egypt, India-Pakistan-China, Guyana-Venezuela, Malaysia-Philippines, etc. is that areas are shown under the country that controls them. Although we lack a list, it's fairly easy to make an impartial judgement on who actually controls the territory in the vast majority of cases (areas too small to make the judgement for aren't really an issue at this scale either). Chipmunkdavis (talk) 21:09, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

I agree. We already had a consensus at Serbia location map.svg that Kosovo should not be treated as part of Serbia in maps. To do so would make them very misleading, and hence incompatible with Commons' educational mission. Different shading or borders may often be appropriate, though. bobrayner (talk) 22:37, 21 January 2015 (UTC)

Leftcry,

Earlier, you said: "Actually the only way to achieve an NPOV map is to show the de facto situation, which is what maps on Wikipedia do."

So, why do you do the opposite thing here? bobrayner (talk) 03:00, 22 January 2015 (UTC)

I don't oppose with showing the de-facto regions but if you're planning to include them, please include all of them. If you include all other breakaway regions then I have absolutely no problem with the map as I really do think the only way to achieve NPOV is to show the de-facto situation. --Leftcry (talk) 03:35, 22 January 2015 (UTC)

Including some other de-facto borders, if they're missing, is definitely a positive step. Which ones did you have in mind? I'm not very good at creating new map elements, but am happy to go along with it if you're planning to add some.

In the meantime, let's not revert an improvement to X just because it isn't improving Y at the same time! bobrayner (talk) 00:33, 23 January 2015 (UTC)

Interactive implementation ?

Is there somewhere a version where countries are clickable ? by example via imagemap Yug (talk) 21:21, 18 May 2014 (UTC)

Coordinate system

An explanation of how the coordinate system works would be helpful.= User:199.94.8.195

Actually there is a way to use GPS coordinates with this map. Some time ago the code was released under the GPL here: [1]. Here's the code in Javascript: [2]. There are two different instructions for using it, they're available here: [3] and here: [4]. And as mentioned in the instructions, the coordinates used for calibration can be verified on this site by moving the pointer on the map: [5]. However, this script needs altering depending on which map it's used on. It would be nice if someone out there, a better coder than me, could calibrate the script to this exact map and put it online with a simple interface where we could enter a longtitude and latitude coordinate, and the script would return the corresponding absolute coordinates, to use with this map. Wikola (talk) 18:13, 21 November 2014 (UTC)

Friendly CSS selection classes

Adding some CSS classes that would allow us to use selectors like :hover more efficiently would be nice. We should have classes that allow us to differentiate between mainland portions, sub-nations and unrecognized nations within larger groupings so that we have the ability to color either an entire country ie. France with Corsica and other French Islands or the ability to highlight each piece individually in a reliable manner. There are a lot of countries affected by this unintentionally such as the US (Alaska) and Canada (Northern portions). We can use individual country codes but a more elegant solution for interactivity should also be discussed. — Preceding unsigned comment was added by Billaferd (talk) 17:15, 22 February 2015‎ (UTC)

Bigger zoom

Is there a way to make the image bigger than 2000px?.

Yes. Just replace the "2000" in the image URL with a larger number. It's not a beautiful solution, but it works. Example: 4000px. Proposal to fix this: Commons:Village pump/Proposals#Available Download Resolutions. — Julian H.^✈ 17:23, 11 October 2015 (UTC)

Crimea

It was said above that these maps should reflect de facto situation. So Crimea is de facto Russian, but tooltip over it says “Ukraine”. Would it be fine to change it to “Russian Federation” or... something like “Disputed between Russian Federation and Ukraine”? — Agent NickTheRed37 (talk) 14:41, 24 August 2015 (UTC)

Anyone here? — Agent NickTheRed37 (talk) 15:47, 13 September 2015 (UTC)

The "Disputed" one sounds like a great idea, I st haven't had the tie over the last few years to do anything substantial with this. I asse it an easily be done though--Canuckguy (talk) 02:04, 11 October 2015 (UTC)

Another variant: “Russian Federation (de facto), Ukraine (de jure)”. — Agent NickTheRed37 (talk) 17:11, 23 March 2016 (UTC)

This map needs to be promptly updated. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ernio48 (talk • contribs) 21:19, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

Aral Sea

Can someone update the map so that the Aral Sea is shown as it actually is? The whole of the eastern part of the South Aral Sea is gone, and the shape in this map is from over a decade ago. I would fix it myself but I use inkscape, which seems to tamper with the coding of this map. —SPESH531Other 05:26, 29 November 2015 (UTC)

Updated nugsl Python script

I submitted a fix to Biercenator's nugsl-worldmap Python script, so that it works with the current version of the map again. It is available on Github: https://github.com/gsl-nagoya-u/gsl-en/tree/master/src/python/nugsl/worldmap --Eginhard (talk) 13:47, 7 February 2016 (UTC)

Manually moving a path between countries

I am trying to manually move an island from one country to another in Notepad++. The little island of Gökçeada/Imbros is included in Greece, but it belongs to Turkey. Simply moving the island's path (path3606) from one section to the other also moved the island a few hundred miles north west (screenshot). What am I doing wrong?

Iago4096 (talk) 10:30, 2 August 2016 (UTC)

OK, I got it, I think. I corrected the coordinates for the island by the translate of the Turkey group. I'll upload the new version later. Why do these translates exist?

Iago4096 (talk) 08:34, 3 August 2016 (UTC)

Also, I want to pretty up greece a little bit. Do we have an actual cutoff for the size of islands to be included? Seems to be a bit random atm.

Iago4096 (talk) 10:53, 5 August 2016 (UTC)

Sahrawi Republic #id

The id of the Sahrawi Republic (represented by a single <path> node) is currently "xz-", and the class is "xz". This is inconsistent: all the other places with low recognition can be selected without a dash. Most of them are part of a <g> element with that id. The one with the most in common with the Sahrawi Republic is Somaliland, because that is also represented by a single <path> node, yet the id of Somaliland's node is "xs" (not "xs-"). I propose that the id of Sahrawi Republic be changed to "xz". I'm unsure if that change will break something, so I don't want to make the change myself. What do you think? Uglemat (talk) 15:35, 27 March 2017 (UTC)

I now see that Sahrawi Republic is only a few hours old, added by Alexander Roumega – what a coincidence! What is your opinion Alexander? Uglemat (talk) 16:26, 27 March 2017 (UTC)

Now I' m working on next version of this map and I'l fix it. Alexander Roumega (talk) 07:44, 28 March 2017 (UTC)

Thanks! :) Uglemat (talk) 10:31, 28 March 2017 (UTC)

Approach of this map?

I don't really understand the approach of this map regarding unrecognised territories:

• By default Kosovo is a part of Serbia (as recognised by the UN), but can be optionally rendered independent
• By default Palestine is an autonomy in Israel (as recognised by the UN), but can be optionally rendered independent
• By default Abkhazia and South Ossetia are a part of Georgia (as recognised by the UN), but can be optionally rendered independent
• By default North Cyprus is a part of Cyprus (as recognised by the UN), but can be optionally rendered independent
• However, Crimea by default is a part of Russia, can be optionally rendered independent, but there is no way to render it as a part of Ukraine as recognised by the UN.

Do we use the de facto situation (and then we render Kosovo, Palestine etc. independent and keep Crimea in Russia) or do we use the internationally recognised situation (and thus we move Crimea to Ukraine with an option to render it as independent or Russian if needed and keep all other unrecognised countries optional). The current approach does not seem to be consistent — NickK (talk) 12:50, 9 September 2017 (UTC)

I've altered Crimea class, so it now reads "coastxx ru ua qr". This allows both .ru and .ua classes to have influence on Crimea. So,

1) if we have defined (in style tag of XML) one of these classes but not another, Crimea will be painted in according color (Russian or Ukrainian)

2) if we have defined both classes, both countries will be painted and Crimea will be painted as belonging to the country, whose class is defined later (lower) in text, as follows

2a) if .ru definition is followed by .ua definition, as in

.ru {fill: red;}
.ua {fill: blue;}

then Crimea will be painted Ukrainian

2b) opposite way it will be painted Russian

3) if one wants to paint both Russia and Ukraine but also wants to highlight Crimea in a different color from either of them (common on maps indicating Crimea as disputed), one should define three classes (ru, ua, qr). Note, that precedence rule described in point 2 still applies, so if one wants to show Crimea as disputed, then qr class should be defined after ru and ua. Otherwise it will be suppressed by one of them.

4) if one wants to paint only Russia or Ukraine but without affecting Crimea, one has to define .ru or .ua class and qr class (keeping in mind rules of precedence described in points 2 and 3), with qr color copied from coastxx class.

As for group hierarchy, I hasn't modified it yet, but the problem is that element cannot belong to two separate (i.e. not nested one in another) <g> tags. It coult remain in <g id="ru" group (Russian), as it is now, it could be moved to Ukrainian group, or it could be moved out of both. This affects "id" style definition (i.e. #ru {CSS stuff} instead of .ru {CSS stuff}), but class rules described above will still work in any of groups. Bests, --Seryo93 (talk) 13:03, 28 September 2017 (UTC) point 4 added on 09:20, 30 September 2017 (UTC)

.antxx class

@Cherkash, on the version of the map was uploaded a few days ago I noticed that changing the fill color for .antxx no longer has any effect. Was this change made intentionally or as a mistake?--Jamesy0627144 (talk) 20:51, 6 February 2019 (UTC)

@Jamesy0627144: unintentional – fixed now. Cherkash (talk) 09:53, 7 February 2019 (UTC)

@Cherkash: It's still not working, but I think the only problem that remains is that the contents of the .antxx { } brackets have been commented out. I will re-upload with the /* */ characters removed and that should fix it.--Jamesy0627144 (talk) 18:05, 7 February 2019 (UTC)

@Jamesy0627144: There's no need to color it differently from any other landmass. If anyone trying to create derivative works wants to color it, THEN (and only then) it should be uncommented. Cherkash (talk) 19:23, 8 February 2019 (UTC)

@Cherkash: I think the file is better off without the antxx properties commented out, and this is the way that the file existed prior to the version you uploaded on February 2. However, if we are going to do it your way then some kind of note should be added to remind people to remove the /* */ characters if they wish to specify properties for the antxx class. Also, wouldn't it make sense to comment out the properties for the limitxx class as well?--Jamesy0627144 (talk) 20:07, 8 February 2019 (UTC)

@Jamesy0627144: Ok, I've got rid of all the comments now, and made what I think is a better treatment of all optional classes (via "opacity" property). Cherkash (talk) 23:18, 8 February 2019 (UTC)

@Cherkash: Looks good.--Jamesy0627144 (talk) 23:06, 9 February 2019 (UTC)

@Cherkash: I found a rather odd glitch with the map that again involves the antxx class. If you specify a color for landxx (red for example) while keeping antxx colored gray, the antxx territories will show up as gray when you open the SVG in any internet browser. However – when you upload the file to wikimedia, any PNG that wikimedia generates (such as the large image at the top of the file page) will show the antxx territories as red instead of gray. Eventually, I was able to figure out that in the following line of code,

<g id="aq" class="antxx landxx coastxx aq">

the order of the classes makes a difference for PNG's on wikimedia, while it does NOT make any difference for SVG's in any internet browser. See for example this test file, where the Madagascar block contains

<g id="mg" class="antxx landxx coastxx mg">

while the Antartica block contains

<g id="aq" class="landxx coastxx antxx aq">

The PNG image at the top of the page shows them as two different colors, but when you open the SVG in any internet browser they are both gray.

Anyways, to fix this I think the 4 antxx territories should have antxx moved to after landxx coastxx instead of before. I will go ahead and make the change myself sometime soon but wanted to give a heads up here first.--Jamesy0627144 (talk) 09:33, 15 February 2019 (UTC)

@Jamesy0627144: My suspicion is that this is a bug in the Mediawiki's PNG renderer – or at least an obvious inconsistency with the other SVG renderers used in various graphics editors and web browsers. There is a discussion thread on this I've started here. I suggest you hold off on making changes until we get to the bottom of this: this file relies heavily on the abstraction layer that's provided by the CSS – and so if this doesn't work correctly, we may need to rethink our approach. Cherkash (talk) 10:54, 15 February 2019 (UTC)

@Jamesy0627144: Meanwhile, you can always change the order in the images that you are trying to create derived from this blank map – or even better, just color the "antxx" territores inside the CSS section explicitly based on their individual codes (after all, there are only 4 of them in the antxx class), and leave the comment (in the same piece of code in the CSS section) for future editors of those images to let them know this is a work-around due to the suspected PNG renderer's bug, and at some point they should just rely on the coloring of the antxx class. Cherkash (talk) 11:01, 15 February 2019 (UTC)

Thank you. I will hold off on making any change.--Jamesy0627144 (talk) 01:29, 16 February 2019 (UTC)

@Jamesy0627144: Just FYI: this indeed seems to be a bug in the renderer used by Mediawiki (see the discussion thread I mentioned above where it's confirmed). So at this point we should just wait for it to be fixed – at which point no changes will be needed in this image. And meanwhile you could just use a work-around I suggested above. Cherkash (talk) 07:48, 17 February 2019 (UTC)

Non-functional code

Anyone know what purpose is served by the color and stroke-miterlimit attributes in the .oceanxx class? Changing either to various values or deleting them has no effect. I believe both are leftover from earlier versions of the file that were edited in Inkscape (which seems to produce a lot of junk code). They should be removed if they don't serve any purpose.--Jamesy0627144 (talk) 05:52, 29 March 2019 (UTC)

Agreed on them doing nothing useful, and removed. Cherkash (talk) 16:22, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

Thank you. One other minor change I would suggest (which can be incorporated into a later version) is to change the 3-digit color code in the .oceanxx class to six. Switching between the two formats is odd and can cause confusion for people not familiar with SVG, so I think it should be consistently applied throughout.--Jamesy0627144 (talk) 18:34, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

Done. Cherkash (talk) 20:45, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

Updates to derived files

With the current file updated to the 3rd April version (courtesy @Cherkash: ), shall we apply the template through for subdivisions and microstates?

Also may I check if there is a purpose in retaining the viewbox in the second line's code: <svg … viewBox="-30 61 2754 1398" width="2754" height="1398">  ?   ~ Newfitz ^Yo! 16:08, 9 April 2019 (UTC)

Feel free to apply the updates to both maps you mentioned: the microstates one is a trivial update (it's a change to a couple lines of code at most), but with subdivisions you need to do a careful comparison and see how to incorporate this file's changes over there (as that map has much more content added to this base file).

As for the ViewBox, it gives the size of the "canvas" for the graphics output. Its semantics (and significance) are most basic for the SVG format, and I'm not sure why you are even asking this question. Cherkash (talk) 23:46, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

I meant having the "-30 61" around in the first place, and whether it would be too much change to the hard geometry to accomodate a map whose viewbox is "0 0", or whose viewbox is undefined (default).   ~ Newfitz ^Yo! 01:05, 12 April 2019 (UTC)

Why "0 0"? – any numbers here are arbitrary and there are no special "correct" ones: they are tied to the actual graphics elements and their coordinates. Think of it this way: first, the elements are drawn on an arbitrary grid, and then the appropriate boundaries are drawn. So if you want to make the ViewBox to contain your choice of numbers (e.g. "0 0" as one of the corners), then you'll have to change coordinates for all graphics elements. I just don't see why you would want to do that... As for ViewBox being undefined, I believe it's a mandatory element, so can't be left out. Again, please go read the standard that defines the SVG format (I've linked it above). Cherkash (talk) 22:08, 16 April 2019 (UTC)

Rojava

Would it be possible to add the Autonomous Administration of North and East Syria (aka Rojava) to the list of Disputed Territories on the map since it is de-facto self-administered and not under the control of the Syrian government? HapHaxion _{(talk / contribs)} 05:11, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

Seems too early for this map, in terms of both international recognition and stability of its borders. Cherkash (talk) 23:39, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

US section of map needs state detail as Mexico

There are now wide differences between the states' laws, so the US section needs the sort of detail Mexico has.Dogru144 (talk) 17:41, 18 May 2019 (UTC)

This is a political map of the world, so the subnational units are not specifically shown. Mexico doesn't have it either: you may be confusing other Central American countries for Mexican states – they are assuredly not, as they are independent countries. Cherkash (talk) 00:43, 25 May 2019 (UTC)

Israel/Palestine

Have Palestine's borders been erased on the map? I know that we are committed to show UN members and observer status, and Palestine still seems selectable, but as the other observer state (Vatican City)'s borders are shown, was there an update that was missed that removed Palestine's?--Canuckguy (talk) 20:42, 28 July 2019 (UTC)

@Canuckguy: Yes: it's been done by me on 1 April 2019 with the edit summary "hide borders of disputed/unrecognized territories by default", following multiple objections and reversions back and forth (mostly from Giorgi Balakhadze). So I've performed this border-hiding in order to avoid any controversy and get away from the edit war the other user initiated. Feel free to unhide these borders (with an incremental edit) if you feel it's justified. (It's a single byte that needs to be changed to accomplish that.) Cherkash (talk) 20:30, 2 August 2019 (UTC)

Why are Palestine and Vatican in different categories when they are both UN observers? Ythlev (talk) 13:08, 18 August 2019 (UTC)

@Ythlev: Being a UN observer is just one of the many yes/no attributes that a state or a territory may have. The main attribute by which the state/territory borders have been historically shown on this map, is international recognition. As such, Vatican City State is an internationally recognized state, whereas Taiwan is only a partially recognized state. Hence the difference in their representation on this map.

Let me say that I'm all for showing the borders of all of the partially recognized states – but unfortunately, other users have been keen on advancing their own state's agendas in recognizing (or rather not recognizing) some territories as de facto independent (although only partially recognized): see my comment above on why the borders of all such states were removed back in April. This was specifically because of another user's not liking South Ossetia and Abkhazia being shown with their borders within Republic of Georgia, which led to some edit-warring, which was resolved by removing all such borders from the map.

So feel free to update the map by showing all such borders – as mentioned above, it's a single byte in this file that needs to be changed to accomplish that: by changing "opacity:0" to "opacity:1" in the right place in the map's CSS preamble. Cherkash (talk) 18:36, 26 August 2019 (UTC)

Grouping of disputed states

@Cherkash: grouping Taiwan into China leads to incorrect maps such as File:JCPOA signatories.svg (original). Disputed states should have their own group. Ythlev (talk) 08:10, 18 August 2019 (UTC)

@Ythlev: It's not about "disputed" status of a territory, but rather about it being "partially recognized". As such, Taiwan is in the same category as, e.g., Kosovo, Artsakh, and Azad Kashmir (among others). So if the distinction between Taiwan and mainland China is important for a given map, then both territories can be colored separately and independently by using their individual labels (in this case, it's "cnx" for mainland China and "tw" for Taiwan). Coloring them together (using "cn" label) is not more right or wrong than, for example, coloring Somalia as a whole ignoring a possibly different status of Somaliland, or doing same for, say, the Northern Cyprus / Republic of Cyprus, or for Artsakh / Azerbaijan, etc. Cherkash (talk) 18:49, 26 August 2019 (UTC)

What do you mean "if the distinction is important"? On almost all coloured maps you can find, Taiwan is coloured differently from China. What reason is there to group Taiwan into China? There is no benefit and only leads to incorrect maps. And yes other places such as Somalia are problematic as well. Again, no benefit of grouping into claiming country. Ythlev (talk) 16:49, 28 August 2019 (UTC)

I mean that for some maps it may be, while for other it may not. And in any case, if you want to unentangle "disputed" territories from their "host" countries, it should ideally be done uniformly for all of them, and such changes better be discussed and agreed on in detail before being implemented. Changing things for Taiwan only, while leaving the rest unchanged, is likely to lead to more confusion as there will be no common logic to the organization of CSS class names. Cherkash (talk) 22:21, 30 August 2019 (UTC)

It is being discussed right here and no one but you have commented. Hence I don't see why not. Ythlev (talk) 14:45, 3 September 2019 (UTC)

@Ythlev: Then please propose a specific organization of the CSS classes in the image that serves the purpose you are trying to achive. And please also state what this purpose is. Currently, the logic is that the top-level classes are for the internationally recognized countries and territories, whereas second-level classes are for the unrecognized and partially recognized territories (which are essentially subclasses under their top-level "host" countries – i.e. the recognized countries within which borders they lie). Cherkash (talk) 15:40, 5 September 2019 (UTC)