On 01/26/2012 01:37 PM, Tim Alder wrote:
On the other side, I believe it's more important that all users know
that OSM is editable as that a user really can come from wikipedia
directly to the editor.
Well, I was partly hoping to do the one with the other.
A problem for implementation seem for me that we must support links to
both most used editors: potlatch and JOSM.
Not sure that is really necessary. All OSM newbies will likely want to
use Potlatch and more advanced OSM users will know how to start Josm
outside of wikipedia.
I see two ways for implementation:
*A small "Edit"-buttom left from the Permalink. With a mouseover should
come than a popup with links to both editors.
*In the option menue we have space to provide the user both links.
If the edit link points to e.g.
that will automatically start the default editor specified in the users
choice. So if an osm user has set JOSM as their default editor, the
wikipedia link would automatically start JOSM via the remote control
plugin. For users who have potlatch as their default (which is the
default default), it will open the area in potlatch. So I don't think
there should be a selection for the different editors in the wikipedia
To show more users that this map is editable seems the first way the
better. Second way is perhaps easier to implement.
I also think the second way is the more "forcefull" way to demonstrate
to users that the maps are editable just like wikipedia itself. A
visible "edit-link" is imho a much better incentive to try and edit maps
that have mistakes than somewhere in the back of your mind knowing that
the data may theoretically be editable.
But the question is can it be done in a way that is clear to wikipedia
users who don't know osm. In that respect the first way might be better.
One problem is that potlatch needs an OSM-account and JOSM needs
additionally that JOSM is installed and running in the background.
A new user will be confused because he doesn't know whats Potlatch and
So it's perhaps better to give a newbi instead more infos to OSM. That's
what we do at:
If somebody would help me with coding, we can test it and decide it later.
I can try and help with the coding.
BTW: Has somebody an idea how to open the permalink of the map in a new
The map is now running mostly in a frame inside wikipedia, so the
permalink doesn't work well and I have not idea where to modify openlayers.
Am 25.01.2012 17:56, schrieb Kai Krueger:
with the osm gadget working nicely in a number of Wikipedias, I was
wondering if it would make sense to add an "edit" link to it? A link
that would get you directly to the OpenStreetMap edit functionality for
the displayed area.
I would guess that quite a number of wikipedia users / editors will not
have heard of OpenStreetMap before and are thus not aware that you can
edit and improve the maps just like one can improve the articles.
Adding an edit link to the osm gadget would potentially increase this
awareness and therefore might help improve the quality of the maps
included in Wikipedia. Especially if wikipedia editors would use the
functionality, the maps would be improved in a way relevant to the
articles. For example add missing footpaths leading up to the monument
described in an article, or add the names in different languages.
Therefore this would hopefully be a win both for Wikipedia and for
There are however possibly a couple of down sides as well. For one, it
might be confusing to wikipedians that you need a separate OpenStreetMap
user account in order to edit the maps, as the Wikipedia account will
obviously not do. Secondly, a lot of the embedded maps are by default
zoomed out so far (e.g. city level) that it is not feasible to edit at
that zoom level. The edit link would therefore have to be restricted to
higher zoom levels. Thirdly, one would have to make sure people are
aware that they are not only editing the map for this one article, but
editing a world wide map database used for many purposes. I.e. make sure
people don't for example delete some points of interest, because they
think it makes the rendering in this article cluttered or
in-appropriate, or add labels for non existent objects to make them show
up on the map for the article.
So the question is, what do others think? Would this be a good idea
overall? How would an edit link best be presented in the osm gadget? Any
other thoughts on this topic?
Maps-l mailing list
Maps-l mailing list