display. Today, GeoHack or WikiMiniAtlas don't do
any of that.
Is there a established procedure for adding new type values?
the appearance of the marker icon based on the type.
Consensus is that new types should not be added, as we do not want to
replicate the category system of Wikipedia. Custom marker icons are not
accounted for either. For the WikiMiniAtlas it would be relatively easy to
parse the categories of an article and choose marker icons accordingly.
For villages/towns/cities, it is a custom to add
with the population in parenthesis. But is this supported by
GeoHack or WikiMiniAtlas? Does the presentation scale (zoom
The size of the dot
marker on the WikiMiniAtlas is chosen according to the
population number. Furthermore the display priority of the label depends on
the population number (as well as the article text size) to ensure that big
cities get displayed at small zoomlevels to facilitate easy orientation on
out. Do we need to specify scale for each place, in
type (and population)?
The types imply default scales. This is implemented in the
WMA (although not
for every type if I recall correctly).
Of the 183,000 coordinates in the German Wikipedia,
specify the physical dimension, the diameter in metres, using the
parameter "dim", for example type:city_dim:25000. It seems that
this value is often one tenth of the scale parameter. Is this
supported by GeoHack or WikiMiniAtlas? Is it planned to be
supported in the future, or is it an old feature going away?
Dim and scale are both
supported by the WikiMiniAtlas. Scale is deprecated at
least on the german WP, as it is meaningless without knowing the output
resolution of the display device (the WMA uses 70dpi which used to be a
standard monitor resolution and at least gives you the right ballpark)
It is common that the coordinate template for creating
link is called indirectly from an infobox template. In that case,
the infobox template takes parameters such as lat_deg, lat_min,...
In the Swedish Wikipedia, we have tended to go away from that and
instead call the coordinate template directly from each article.
Is one way better than the other? Is there a global trend?
That is somewhat a
matter of taste. There was a consensus(?) on en WP to use
the coordinate templates in the infoboxes, but there are arguments for having
coord parameters in the infoboxes (the infoboxes then can set sensible
default values for coordinate parameters such as type and population (which
would have to be specified redundantly otherwise))
How will the introduction, presumably later this year,
maps from OpenStreetMap, effect the questions above?
I will be out of a job :-)