2014-04-02 16:36 GMT+03:00 Max Semenik <maxsem.wiki(a)gmail.com>om>:
On 02.04.2014, 17:32 Strainu wrote:
Yes. And that would be more useful than a map
with a single coordinate
of whatever happens to be the first mountain in the list.
Nope, lists should have no primary coordinates at all. Still, what's
the real use case for such lists with unnamed points other than
"because we can"?:)
Can we please keep the discussion on list?
First of all, I don't think the use-case I presented is equivalent to
"because we can". But here is another usecase: When I parse
coordinates from articles or pictures, I try to get them from the
database because it's faster and more reliable than parsing the
geohack link. If tomorrow 90% of that database dissapears because it
has no "name" (something I couldn't care less about) and some obscure
template does not mark the coordinates as primary, the running time of
my robots will probably increase by 30-50%.
Adding names to coordinates is not something most people do, at least
on small wikis. I admit I have no idea how to do it. If I'll ever feel
the need, I'll read the docs and apply the method, but I can't send
everybody to read technical documentation just because you decided to
remove a feature that works fine just because you think it's
"useless".
From the moment the feature went live on the Wikimedia
sites, it is at
the very least preferable, if not compulsory to think about
backwards
compatibility and only remove a feature if we're reasonably sure we're
not going to affect a lot of people.
Strainu