Some summaries, correct if I have understood poorly:
- The use of KML in the Template:Map does not gain support. But from the
underlying (bounding box, coordinate point) data it is possible to generate
KML as well as other formats. Should we require to make KML less apparent,
especially not encourage to use it in subpages?
- Georeferencing data can be stored in MapWarper, as the data resides on
WMF servers. Do you see a need to store that data along with the image in
- If we settle on the principles of the Template:Map, it can be added to
the GLAM-wiki toolset for mass uploads of maps to the Commons. Please have
a look at http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Template:Map
and comment in
- Tim A. brought up the other way of georeferencing more modern maps:
identifying corner coordinates and giving a map projection to match the
coordinates. I have been thinking about this as well. We should place it on
the list of desired features, but probably we will not have enough time to
apply it in the first phase.
- Should we point to maps in the Commons or do we make copies of them when
we work with them in the WM MapWarper? Tim A. suggests we upload a file
from Commons over an URL parameter and that the MapWarper should use image
names from commons. This means the image is a copy, right? But shares the
same ID (name).
- Are we able to conduct any searches at this stage? Such as finding maps
on a map?
- Replace the authentication procedure with usage of O-Auth/OpenID to work
with the Wikimedia-Account. If we do not have the time, is it ok to use the
- MapWarper transformation uses GDAL libraries.
- Susanna has drawn some quick wireframes. Please comment, and we can
continue based on your comments.
2013/6/21 Tim Alder <tim.alder(a)s2002.tu-chemnitz.de>
Hello, I learn now:
Wraps is something to eat, so it's better to use warper.
Am 21.06.2013 14:39, schrieb Tim Waters:
Tim, it's map-warper not map-wraper :-)
However you are not the first in making this mistake and I really like
"MapWrapper" the name, and a few groups in India think that this is a
better way to think about how a map wraps around the world, as opposed
to maps warping.
On 21 June 2013 09:56, Tim Alder
I wondering why the new template support the old KML-overlay.
I think i'm missing the point here, but the warper has a KML output
which works nicely in google earth but the subset of kml support in
google maps is very poor, (and non existent in their new maps offering)
We had 2007 a solution in Commons that use KML and Google Earth for maps
overlay, you can found it at Template:Overlay. But it had lots of
limitation as it supports only positioning,scaling and rotation.
Maps-warpers kml-export is much more flexible because it based on an
transformated/warped image. So I would keep the old kml overlay unchange
but would support for the new system only maps-warper.
With parameters I mean a list of matching points. Also if I know
that for modern maps that are generated by
users in a GIS-system, it
would be nice to support GDAL
for transformations. But I
don't believe that maps-wraper support it.
The warper actually only uses GDAL (gdalwarp and gdal_translate) to
do the transformations.
What I mean here was that it would be nice if I could say that my map is
in Projection xy and give the coordinates at the border or so,
instead of using tons of matching points. But for the beginning I believe
we can life with matching points.
Greetings Tim alias Kolossos
Maps-l mailing list
*Susanna Ånäs *Käyttäjä:Susannaanas
Wikimedia Suomi <http://fi.wikimedia.org/wiki/Etusivu> –
blog.wikimedia.fi / @
/ Facebook <https://www.facebook.com/WikimediaSuomi> / Liity