Template talk:Graphic Lab/statistics

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search

IG[edit]

@Sarang: {{Image generation}} codes are SO obscure I have no idea what they are for and how they could help rather than confuse the user. It seems to be an additional, extrem minification of the earlier and human readable map + fr (aka type + language). Is this additional abstraction layer of any use ? Shouldn't we remove those references ? Yug (talk) 16:07, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Wooow.... It's actually in use ???? #Brainfuck#Hello_World! Yug (talk) 16:23, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Yug: You are right, and I know that this template is too difficult for a swift understanding or use; with the script it is much easier !
And while the coding {{ IgenI+<gPs = m }} is too much abbreviated, it is possible to use another format e.g.
{{ File generation description
00SVG tool = Inkscape
00Text as path = yes
00Graphic Lab = pl
00Topic = map }}
which will generate exactly the same, but not so obscure – all parameters in human readable format; I made it as an example at POL Zabrze Zaborze MAP.svg.
Files like the Maps of Zabrze should be decribed, and you may do it however you liike. -- sarang사랑 18:42, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I argue for relevant descriptions. But this {{Igen|I|+|<|gP|s=m}} is far too abstracted yes. gP is one single variable containing two informations -graphic lab AND language polish- under the form of 2 letters, it violate 2 basic principles of parametry. It's not even scalable : we already have 24 graphic lab (main page) according to wikidata what letter to use when we get to 30, do we switch to Greek ? Nor it is human readable. en:WP:Jargon. The minified version of Image generation goes too far. Yug (talk) 22:03, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The standard form for Graphic Lab is g=xx where xx can be any of the national labs; only some of them (which are often used) have also a two-letter abbreviation. You may use what you like better, and if you care for understandable template source code you can use the named parameter – the output is always the same.
Descriptions exist at several places, but because the templates handle too many properties the have too many parameters and possible parameter values, therefore the descriptions cannot be read or overviewed just in an instance.
The templates are not articles that everybody should be able to read easily, they are mere technical, so they need a technical language for their documentation which adresses not all grandmothers but wikimedia editors with a high skill for templates, as you are one. Also their output lines can be a riddle (and confusing) for people without knowledge of SVG, W3C, editors like e.g. Inkscape, Graphic labs, embedded text and all the other properties a graphic may consist of. Most of the specialized categories, as for grapics maintenance, are hidden, they are technical and not of interest for many readers. Most people have no interest in licenses and will not look at their specification, which is also rather technical and legal. -- sarang사랑 07:51, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Yug, you are right in most things, but not when you tell that positional parameters violate any principles. One single positional parameter may contain many informations, exactly like a named parameter can do. Too it cannot be bad when a (named) parameter has a (positional) alias, that happens often in a great lot of templates, to offer different possibilities, sometimes to novice and to expert users. It is an additional convenience, when a positional parameter can occur at any position, not only at a single specified one. -- sarang사랑 08:39, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]


Count[edit]

I did a recount of the files here but landed on 30,000 files. A lost of 4,000 in 3 years since the last handcount. I see the German count (~2,300 now) is far lower that I remember (10,000+), so I suspect some templating and catagories has changed there and need a fix. Yug (talk) 12:51, 22 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Lol, found a batch at Category:Kartenwerkstatt (SVG) with 4,323. These 3,729 files are pretty close to the 4,000 lose I identified ! I'am pretty sure the German divided other catagories as well. Yug (talk) 12:55, 22 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]