I'm presently discussing into it.source an idea to use categories in a new
way, with an "ontology-like" approach that allows a much more effective use
of +incategory (category intersection) and multi-axial categorization. As a
pathologist, I'd like to test this approach in [[Category:Pathology]] and
[[Category:Histopathology]] fields, merging them. Nothing will be changed,
but creation of a limited number of new "keyword-like" categories, with some
simple tranclusion trick inside their code, and use of them into image
pages, nor there's any need of any extension or special code.
My question is: have I to discuss here a little more this project, or is it
better to implement boldly a limited example of my idea, to discuss it on
with a running example?
The 2008 Picture of the Year competition is now concluded at last,
and we are happy to announce the results:
WINNER: Horses on Bianditz mountain
(File:Biandintz eta zaldiak - modified2.jpg)
# 1 - 74 votes in Round 2
# 1 - 260 votes in Round 1 - Category:Other animals
Taken by Mikel Ortega Edited by Richard Bartz. .
RUNNER-UP: Fire breathing "Jaipur Maharaja Brass Band" in Chassepierre, Belgium.
(File:Fire breathing 2 Luc Viatour.jpg)
# 2 - 71 votes in Round 2
# 1 - 225 votes in Round 1 - Category:People and human activities
Taken by Wikimedian Luc Viatour.
2ND RUNNER-UP: Steam locomotives of the Chicago & Northwestern Railway in the roundhouse
# 3 - 46 votes in Round 2
# 1 - 170 votes in Round 1 - Category:Constructions
Taken by Jack Delano.
As we couldn't get the automated server set up,
a low-tech voting method was used this year, and
we had a trouble in checking and took so much time.
(We hope there will be a better system for next year)
In the first round, there were 501 images in the gallery.
The candidates were all the files which were promoted to
the Featured Picture of Wikimedia Commons in 2008.
51 files, the winners and honourable mentions in each category
went on to the final round to select the picture of the year 2008,
where 712 voters voted.
Congratulations to all the contributors
who helped create these beautiful works
and made them available to the world as free content.
A complete listing of the voting totals is available at
Thanks to all the voters for participating.
Thanks, Wikimedia Commons Picture of the Year committee
Power up the Internet with Yahoo! Toolbar.
While tools like firefogg are essential for basic usability, a lot of
our contributors use local movie editing apps on macs to prepare files
for upload. It's best if they can save directly to ogg. The XiphQT
codec set allows this and it also enables safari to play ogg.
It would be handy if some folks to could test this pre-release.
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Arek Korbik <arkadini(a)gmail.com>
Date: Fri, May 29, 2009 at 3:13 PM
Subject: [theora] XiphQT pre-release builds
To: theora(a)xiph.org, ogg-dev(a)xiph.org
I've just built fresh binaries of XiphQT - with trunks of Xiph libs
and FLAC from the end of the last year. Code-wise there are few
changes in the components since the last release: a memory leak fixed
and the recently reported issue with iMovie'08 solved.
I'd appreciate any help testing, especially on PPC as I don't have
access to that architecture anymore. You can find the binaries at:
A question - I used to do releases just building all from trunks,
including the Xiph libs. Are there any serious reasons I should
consider using latest releases instead, if just for some of the libs,
for the upcoming release? I wasn't following the changes that closely
so I'm not sure if using trunks is still a good idea...
theora mailing list
I went to the page below and tried adding my name and it came back
"This service is currently unavailable." Still, worth trying to add
your name to.
Anything else reasonable to request?
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Joe Anderson <computerjoe(a)gmail.com>
Subject: [Wikimediauk-l] OPSI Unlocking Request
I submitted a request to OPSI (HMSO) to release pictures of MPs and
Lords under a free licence. They are a number of problems, for example
OPSI don't own the copyrights. However, we can use their 'unlocking'
tool to show there is a demand.
I find it amazing that thee aren't free pictures of our
representatives. In the US, pictures of Senators and Representatives
are Public Domain.
Anyway, to see more go to
Wikimedia UK mailing list
Brion Vibber <brion(a)wikimedia.org> wrote:
> If anybody's got any particularly interesting issues, examples,
> problems, or idea prototypes relating to usage of SVG on Wikipedia and
> other Wikimedia sites, I'd love to see how much I can pack in. :)
I don't know if this is possible, but one feature I'd particularly like to see in Wikipedia is parametrized SVG rendering. For example, when illustrating location of each one of the 210 Slovenian municipalities, it would be cool if (a) you could only have one file with map template, and (b) then specify "[[Image:Obcine_Slovenija_2006.svg|mark_tag="Trbovlje"|color=red]]" or something like that to get this result: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Obcine_Slovenija_2006_Trbovlje.svg
In a present situation, I have to slightly modify the master SVG file and upload 210 two-megabyte files, which is not amusing. Every few years municipality borders get changed, so we have to upload 210+ two-megabyte files yet again.
Is this possible at all?
Hi all --
I'm putting together a talk proposal for SVG Open 2009, which will be in
early October at the Google campus in Mountain View, CA:
I've got plenty of background I can pull in on the challenges and
benefits of SVG on the web and the tradeoffs we've made in our usage and
implementation, but I know lots of you folks out there have been more
active on the 'content-generation' end of things and can point out some
things I wouldn't think of.
If anybody's got any particularly interesting issues, examples,
problems, or idea prototypes relating to usage of SVG on Wikipedia and
other Wikimedia sites, I'd love to see how much I can pack in. :)
Pointers to cool feature proposals like Nikola's localization
presentation at Wikimania last year, or bulk anaylsis like benchmarks
and compatibility tests on images in actual use would be of particular
-- brion vibber (brion @ wikimedia.org)
There's an interesting deletion discussion taking place here;
concerning an image of a woman with sperm on her neck. To my mind it's very
doubtful that this is in fact a freely licensed image, but regardless of my
cynicism, the IP who nominated the image for deletion (the 5th time it's
been nominated, and the 4th time was by me, in December) raised the
possibility that we (both commons, wikipedia, and perhaps by extension all
wmf projects) might be better to opt for drawings rather than photographs of
I'm sure many are familiar with my view that the foundation is an acutely
irresponsible host in this area (I'm not a fan, for example, of the pictures
taken of topless women on beaches without their permission which commons
currently hosts) - but wonder what the feeling is out there in regard to
freely licensed images of people having sex - we've currently got quite a
few on commons, and it's likely to be a growth area. There's a dirty pun in
there somewhere, but I can't be bothered to make it......
Time to ask this again! (i.e. I'm thinking of spending money on one.)
What's the state of affordable negative scanners at this time? I'm
seeing little things that require Windows for £70 or so. Anyone bought
any such device recently?