I like your work!
Based on this discussion, I vote for creating a new {{Map}} template.
Still, I am missing some librarian voice in the discussion.
Cheers,
Susanna
2013/5/31 Tuszynski, Jaroslaw W. <JAROSLAW.W.TUSZYNSKI(a)saic.com>
The attributes below match better Commons Book
template [1] than commons
Artwork template [2]. One difference is that Book template is a better fit
for non- unique objects as it is lacking “Current location” and “Accession
number” fields essential for Artwork. ****
** **
Here are the mappings to current templates:****
*Zotero label*
*CSL fieldname*
*MapWarper*
*template:Book *
*template:Artwork*
Scale****
none****
scale****
-> description****
-> description****
Language****
none****
****
language****
****
Short Title****
none****
****
-> title ****
-> title ****
Library Catalog****
none****
****
****
****
Rights****
none****
****
permission****
permission****
ISBN****
ISBN****
****
ISBN****
****
URL****
URL****
Source / Bibliographic Ref URL****
source****
source****
Abstract****
abstract****
****
-> description****
-> description****
Accessed****
accessed****
****
****
****
Archive****
archive****
****
****
current location (institution)****
Loc. in Archive****
archive_location****
****
****
current location(location)****
Call Number****
call-number****
Call Number****
****
Accession number****
Series Title****
collection-title****
****
Series Title****
****
Edition****
edition****
****
Edition****
****
Place****
event-place *and publisher-place*****
Place of Publication****
Place of publication (City)****
****
Type****
genre****
****
****
object type****
Date****
issued****
Published Date****
Date****
date****
Extra****
note****
****
****
notes****
Publisher****
publisher****
Publisher****
Publisher****
****
Title****
title****
title****
title****
title****
****
****
description****
description****
description****
****
****
tags****
****
****
****
****
subject area****
-> description****
-> description****
****
****
Metadata Unique iD****
****
****
****
****
Author****
author****
artist****
****
****
Date Depicted****
->date****
->date****
****
****
Reprint Date****
->date****
->date****
****
****
Metadata Projection****
-> description****
-> description****
****
****
Metadata Location: lat, lon****
template:Object location****
template:Object location****
** **
I used “->field” symbol for cases where few external fields can be mapped
to one template field.****
** **
Commons templates can be expanded a little bit in case of individual files
with help of Template:Information_field [3]. But that makes hard to read
wikicode. So I see 2 options here: ****
**1) **Expand current commons templates. Several times in last year
I run into a problem of unique written documents which were right in the
middle between {{Book}} and {{Artwork}}. I think {{book}} might benefit
from fields that allow describing institution that hold it ( institution,
location/department within the institution, accession number). We can
propose adding those.****
**2) **We can create a new {{Map}} template (either from scratch or
by expanding other templates) that would accommodate this and possibly
other fields which are now placed in description field of files (N S W E
limits, projection/S stretch, etc.). Some of those fields might lend
themselves into automatic KML production. ****
** **
Jarek T.****
User:jarekt****
** **
[1]
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Template:Book ****
[2]
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Template:Artwork ****
[3]
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Template:Information_field ****
** **
*From:* susanna.anas(a)gmail.com [mailto:susanna.anas@gmail.com] *On Behalf
Of *Susanna Ånäs
*Sent:* Thursday, May 30, 2013 3:20 PM
*To:* Tim Alder
*Cc:* Map integration; Tuszynski, Jaroslaw W.; Valentine Charles; dan
entous; David Haskiya
*Subject:* Re: [Maps-l] Wikimaps: About the template for maps****
** **
Let's stick to the mailing list!****
** **
If you want to keep up with the rest of the discussion, it would be
beneficial to subscribe to the list. With this thread I think we can
continue as is.****
** **
Let's continue. We need to get ****
- opinions/information about relevant bibliographic metadata schemes****
- whatever the mapwarper stores with a rectified map****
** **
Here are the map attributes from MapWarper:****
Title****
Description****
Tags****
Subject area****
Metadata Unique iD****
Source / Bibliographic Ref URL****
Call Number****
Publisher****
Place of Publication****
Author(s)****
Date Depicted****
Published Date****
Reprint Date****
Scale****
Metadata Projection****
Metadata Location: lat, lon****
** **
Here's what Zotero offers:****
** **
*Zotero label*****
*Zotero fieldname*****
*CSL fieldname*****
Scale****
scale****
*none*****
Language****
language****
*none*****
Short Title****
shortTitle****
*none*****
Library Catalog****
libraryCatalog****
*none*****
Rights****
rights****
*none*****
ISBN****
ISBN****
ISBN****
URL****
url****
URL****
Abstract****
abstractNote****
abstract****
Accessed****
accessDate****
accessed****
Archive****
archive****
archive****
Loc. in Archive****
archiveLocation****
archive_location****
Call Number****
callNumber****
call-number****
Series Title****
seriesTitle****
collection-title****
Edition****
edition****
edition****
Place****
place****
event-place *and*
publisher-place****
Type****
mapType****
genre****
Date****
date****
issued****
Extra****
extra****
note****
Publisher****
publisher****
publisher****
Title****
title****
title****
** **
Here's my summary of fields from these 2 sources that are not in the
Artwork template:****
Map type****
Tags****
Subject area/Event place****
Metadata unique ID****
Call number = accession number?****
Publisher****
Place of publication****
Date of publication = date?****
Date depicted****
Reprint date****
Scale****
Metadata projection****
Metadata location: lat + lon****
Language****
Library Catalogue****
ISBN****
URL****
Accessed****
Series title****
Edition****
** **
Cheers,****
Susanna****
** **
2013/5/30 Tim Alder <tim.alder(a)s2002.tu-chemnitz.de>****
Thanks Jarek to remember the old KML-overlay solution (A project of
User:Dschwen and me from 2007). The KML-solution had very limited features
to make complex transformation to map an historical map on the actual
world, but we can use the principle to provide via a template a link to a
tool that use data from an Wiki subpage.
With the KML-solution we could only store lat, lon, 2 values for scaling
the map and rotation angle. Now I would store a list of matching points
with x,y in pixel of the map and lat,lon. Would this be ok for Maps-wraper?
(I'm not an expert in this area.)
Like Maarten Dammers I want to make a first rapid hack as a base for the
final solution.
If we know the parameter definition I could hack a template let's say
"overlay2" that opens the right page in Maps-wraper's map viewer[1]. For
this it would be nice if Maps-wraper could work with Commons imagenames as
identifier instead of numbers. Would these be possible?
The Maps-wraper should have on the other side an export page for the
matching parameters so that a user can store it on commons at a subpage.
The advantage of the KML-solution was that we don't need any caching
storage. Now the transformations cost a lot of cpu-time so we need a
caching of the tiles at maps-wraper.
Greetings Tim Alder
P.S: I think we should organize the communication so that every mail is
going directly to everone or we should use only the maps-l mailing list[2].
So it is confusing. I would prefer the mailing list but don't want to loose
anyone how is interested. Sussana should decide.
[1]
http://maps-warper.instance-proxy.wmflabs.org/maps/1
[2]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/maps-l****
2013/5/30 Tuszynski, Jaroslaw W. <JAROSLAW.W.TUSZYNSKI(a)saic.com****
<mailto:JAROSLAW.W.TUSZYNSKI@saic.com>>
Hi all,____
__ __****
A standard, way of geolocating maps involves use of subpages with
KML code. See for example
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Dayton,_Indiana_1878.png and
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Dayton,_Indiana_1878.png/overlay.kml
. There was not a whole lot of people creating those KML’s and the
software often does not like the subpages of files, but the
infrastructure is there ready to use. If there was more interest in
using them we could discuss some improvements to the system. We
could also streamline kml production based on available data. Most
current files are created using North/South/East/West edges and
possible rotation. It might be more convenient to use coordinates of**
**
4 corners, which is a format also supported by KML. ____
__ __
Another possibility would be to use Template:GeoPolygon, or both. ____
__ __****
Are there any other fields specific to maps that are not
template:Artwork? We could always upload a few sample images by hand
(or pick existing ones) and ask community for help on formatting
metadata, which would be than used as a template (using non
Wikipedia meaning of the word) for the other uploads. That way we
can easily see what are the possible improvements to Commons****
templates (using Wikipedia meaning of the word).____
__ __****
We could also create a specialized template for maps, which could be
just extension of Artwork template. But it would be the best to
avoid that if not necessary. Rarely used templates tend to get****
little attention and maintenance. ____
__ __
Jarek T.____
User:jarekt____