Google is throwing the Wikipedia layer out of Google Maps under the guise of "improvement", while it actually sets several steps back in time. It is like going to the Middle Ages instead of the future. It shows that commercial companies do not make decisions by looking what people like, need and want, but let the end users down. In the past such changes in software always was a moment for me to consider if there are alternatives and if possible to switch over to them.
Considering this for finding a Wikipedia layer on maps, I do not know any. But I do know there is an open source alternative, just like Wikipedia, but then for maps, OpenStreetMap.
We already work together in some way, we use the maps of OpenStreetMap in our Toolserver maps when we click on the coordinates on articles.
Unfortunately I couldn't find any layer for Wikipedia on http://openstreetmap.org
I think it would be good if we as Wikimedia would broaden our use of and connections with OpenStreetMap and let both communities work together more.
(It is unlikely to happen I think, but OpenStreetMap would be perfectly under the wing of WMF, just as Wikivoyage.)
We should strive on working together with OpenStreetMap, we supplement each other.
Romaine
2013/8/25 Romaine Wiki romaine_wiki@yahoo.com:
Google is throwing the Wikipedia layer out of Google Maps under the guise of "improvement", while it actually sets several steps back in time. It is like going to the Middle Ages instead of the future.
I wouldn't go *that* far. Opportunities come and go, and so are reusers of our content. This is not such a big deal for Wikipedia, I believe.
It shows that commercial companies do not make decisions by looking what people like, need and want, but let the end users down. In the past such changes in software always was a moment for me to consider if there are alternatives and if possible to switch over to them.
Considering this for finding a Wikipedia layer on maps, I do not know any. But I do know there is an open source alternative, just like Wikipedia, but then for maps, OpenStreetMap.
We already work together in some way, we use the maps of OpenStreetMap in our Toolserver maps when we click on the coordinates on articles.
Unfortunately I couldn't find any layer for Wikipedia on http://openstreetmap.org
Perhaps the WMF should provide that? Kolossos has done a tremendous job with his work on the subject. Moving from the toolserver to the labs could be a good moment to increase the resource allocated to that project.
I think OSM would be happy with the idea. One of their layers (the transport map) is already provided by a third party AFAIK.
I think it would be good if we as Wikimedia would broaden our use of and connections with OpenStreetMap and let both communities work together more.
(It is unlikely to happen I think, but OpenStreetMap would be perfectly under the wing of WMF, just as Wikivoyage.)
No it wouldn't. The OSM Foundation has proven in many ways superior to the WMF (consider only the way licence change was approached on their and and on the WMF wikis...). Perhaps some of this image is due to cultural differences between Europe and the US (me being biased towards the European model), but I don't think so.
Also, compared to Wikivoyage, OSM has far superior visibility.
We should strive on working together with OpenStreetMap, we supplement each other.
Have a nice weekend, Strainu
Do you have a specific article that talks about this? Do remember the new Google Maps is still in beta. It's (still) impossible to use on older computers because it is so slow and laggy - it's possible the WMF could lobby them to keep it around. Mono
From: strainu10@gmail.com Date: Sun, 25 Aug 2013 01:31:51 +0300 To: wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] The failure of Google, looking for open source alternatives
2013/8/25 Romaine Wiki romaine_wiki@yahoo.com:
Google is throwing the Wikipedia layer out of Google Maps under the guise of "improvement", while it actually sets several steps back in time. It is like going to the Middle Ages instead of the future.
I wouldn't go *that* far. Opportunities come and go, and so are reusers of our content. This is not such a big deal for Wikipedia, I believe.
It shows that commercial companies do not make decisions by looking what people like, need and want, but let the end users down. In the past such changes in software always was a moment for me to consider if there are alternatives and if possible to switch over to them.
Considering this for finding a Wikipedia layer on maps, I do not know any. But I do know there is an open source alternative, just like Wikipedia, but then for maps, OpenStreetMap.
We already work together in some way, we use the maps of OpenStreetMap in our Toolserver maps when we click on the coordinates on articles.
Unfortunately I couldn't find any layer for Wikipedia on http://openstreetmap.org
Perhaps the WMF should provide that? Kolossos has done a tremendous job with his work on the subject. Moving from the toolserver to the labs could be a good moment to increase the resource allocated to that project.
I think OSM would be happy with the idea. One of their layers (the transport map) is already provided by a third party AFAIK.
I think it would be good if we as Wikimedia would broaden our use of and connections with OpenStreetMap and let both communities work together more.
(It is unlikely to happen I think, but OpenStreetMap would be perfectly under the wing of WMF, just as Wikivoyage.)
No it wouldn't. The OSM Foundation has proven in many ways superior to the WMF (consider only the way licence change was approached on their and and on the WMF wikis...). Perhaps some of this image is due to cultural differences between Europe and the US (me being biased towards the European model), but I don't think so.
Also, compared to Wikivoyage, OSM has far superior visibility.
We should strive on working together with OpenStreetMap, we supplement each other.
Have a nice weekend, Strainu
Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
On 24 August 2013 23:40, User Mono usermono@outlook.com wrote:
Do you have a specific article that talks about this? Do remember the new Google Maps is still in beta. It's (still) impossible to use on older computers because it is so slow and laggy - it's possible the WMF could lobby them to keep it around. Mono
+1 - as far as I know it doesn't even allow you to go via anywhere yet - it's just a simple A to B.
2013/8/25 Strainu strainu10@gmail.com:
2013/8/25 Romaine Wiki romaine_wiki@yahoo.com:
Unfortunately I couldn't find any layer for Wikipedia on http://openstreetmap.org
Perhaps the WMF should provide that? Kolossos has done a tremendous job with his work on the subject. Moving from the toolserver to the labs could be a good moment to increase the resource allocated to that project.
I think OSM would be happy with the idea. One of their layers (the transport map) is already provided by a third party AFAIK.
This year at Wikimania in Hong Kong there has been a "Wikimaps" panel, where it was discussed the possibility to duplicate the OSM whole stack to serve OpenStreetMap in Wikipedia. The bottom line for me was "we want more OpenStreetMap in Wikimedia projects". Many user active in the field, some people from Wikidata and from WMF devs and staff were there.
During that discussion the point that emerged was "it is doable, but it is not easy to replicate the stack (or only the tileserver) to do so some dedicated developers are needed", so my understanding is that the point is "is this a need that is widespread enough that the Foundation should look into it"?
As Peter said:
2013/8/25 Peter Gervai grinapo@gmail.com:
On Sun, Aug 25, 2013 at 11:58 AM, Tomasz Ganicz polimerek@gmail.com wrote:
You can also propose a new features to be added to the official OSM database schema.
It is not a question of OSM database, it's a question of services based on the database, especially those related to slippy map with mapped external content. OSMF doesn't have the resources to get this done, and they even struggle under the load of their tile server being used by the general public. In fact you're advised against using their tile server and you are advised to create one for your own. For example this is one point where WMF _may_ be able to help, but it's a high demand service.
Also, always in HK, there has been a OSM introductory workshop and a brief mapping party organized by User:Aude.
We should strive on working together with OpenStreetMap, we supplement each other.
As I said in a thread some weeks ago in Italy, Wikimedia Italia (the WMF Italian chapter) is discussing with the Italian OSM community to make Wikimedia Italia also a OSMF chapter (they have the same model, drawn mostly from our experience).
Besides that, I think I am happy with OSM being managed by another entity (the OSM Foundation), I think that it is healtier for the the FLOSS/OpenCulture movement and also it is better for OSM which is a very big project. Of course in case of need e.g. if some government try to censor OSM, I think that we as a community and also WMF should weigh in.
2013/8/25 Tomasz Ganicz polimerek@gmail.com:
http://openstreetmap.org - is just a starting point to OSM
About the main issue discussed here I quote completely Tomasz. This is one of the first things to know about OSM, probably the tool you need already exists, it is just out there.
IMHO, many people use Google Maps because "it just works", you write "go from A to B" and it shows routing. Search "pizzeria" and they pop out". OSM has all this stuff, but they are spread in different sites, for example: * http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Routing * or the already cited http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/List_of_OSM_based_Services
To me this looks a little like the people who are not using Linux because they don't want to spend time/are not able to find their way around distributions, versions and things like that; the perception being that "there is only one Windows or Mac OS" (which is not true but, that's the whole point).
Cristian
On Mon, Aug 26, 2013 at 12:52 PM, Cristian Consonni kikkocristian@gmail.com wrote:
2013/8/25 Strainu strainu10@gmail.com:
2013/8/25 Romaine Wiki romaine_wiki@yahoo.com:
Unfortunately I couldn't find any layer for Wikipedia on http://openstreetmap.org
http://osm.org/ is an example renderer. OSM is the _database_. The information is in it, and there are several renderers showing various external content.
This year at Wikimania in Hong Kong there has been a "Wikimaps" panel, where it was discussed the possibility to duplicate the OSM whole stack to serve OpenStreetMap in Wikipedia. The bottom line for me was
What should be noted, however, that we should: 1) avoid to duplicate anything which is done very well by OSMF (which is maintaining, operating and expanding OSM database), and 2) plan anything a way which helps OSM to get more user contribution, either through Notes or by direct editing (so we should make it easy for users to reach OSM edit fesatures over there.
Btw see http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Collaboration_with_Wikipedia
g
On 08/26/2013 07:37 AM, Peter Gervai wrote:
On Mon, Aug 26, 2013 at 12:52 PM, Cristian Consonni kikkocristian@gmail.com wrote:
2013/8/25 Strainu strainu10@gmail.com:
2013/8/25 Romaine Wiki romaine_wiki@yahoo.com:
Unfortunately I couldn't find any layer for Wikipedia on http://openstreetmap.org
http://osm.org/ is an example renderer. OSM is the _database_. The information is in it, and there are several renderers showing various external content.
This year at Wikimania in Hong Kong there has been a "Wikimaps" panel, where it was discussed the possibility to duplicate the OSM whole stack to serve OpenStreetMap in Wikipedia. The bottom line for me was
What should be noted, however, that we should:
- avoid to duplicate anything which is done very well by OSMF (which
is maintaining, operating and expanding OSM database), and 2) plan anything a way which helps OSM to get more user contribution, either through Notes or by direct editing (so we should make it easy for users to reach OSM edit fesatures over there.
Btw see http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Collaboration_with_Wikipedia
g
Thanks to everyone who's been offering ideas and thoughts in this thread! Could we move to maps-l (cc'd)?
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/maps-l
I recently posted to maps-l about plans for the OSM tileserver that Wikimedia is going to host: http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/maps-l/2013-August/001305.html
2013/8/26 Sumana Harihareswara sumanah@wikimedia.org:
Thanks to everyone who's been offering ideas and thoughts in this thread! Could we move to maps-l (cc'd)?
Thank you for reminding me of a mailing list I should have subscribed to a long ago ;o.
C
http://openstreetmap.org - is just a starting point to OSM - it has no layers at all. OSM in general is a database with various map data. You can render this data as you wish. On http://www.openstreetmap.org you have several renders which you can switch - the basic one is called mapnik. You cannot render everything as the map would be difficuilt to read. Among others there is a key in OSM data schema which let you link the objects (points, roads and areas) to the relevant Wikipedia articiles.
See: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:wikipedia
Many OSM mappers actually add this key to many objects. http://openstreetmap.org does not show this key just because it is minor, extra thing for a general-purpose map, but you can create your own render and use it on your own website and many websites are actually using OSM data in various ways. See:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/List_of_OSM_based_Services
Actually we are doing this - see: OSM extention for MediaWiki and MiniWikiAtlas. There is even a project page on OSM wiki regarding cooperation with Wikipedia:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Collaboration_with_Wikipedia
Read it - and if you have any good ideas - just tell the people - or better - try to implement it ;-)
2013/8/25 Romaine Wiki romaine_wiki@yahoo.com:
Google is throwing the Wikipedia layer out of Google Maps under the guise of "improvement", while it actually sets several steps back in time. It is like going to the Middle Ages instead of the future. It shows that commercial companies do not make decisions by looking what people like, need and want, but let the end users down. In the past such changes in software always was a moment for me to consider if there are alternatives and if possible to switch over to them.
Considering this for finding a Wikipedia layer on maps, I do not know any. But I do know there is an open source alternative, just like Wikipedia, but then for maps, OpenStreetMap.
We already work together in some way, we use the maps of OpenStreetMap in our Toolserver maps when we click on the coordinates on articles.
Unfortunately I couldn't find any layer for Wikipedia on http://openstreetmap.org
I think it would be good if we as Wikimedia would broaden our use of and connections with OpenStreetMap and let both communities work together more.
(It is unlikely to happen I think, but OpenStreetMap would be perfectly under the wing of WMF, just as Wikivoyage.)
We should strive on working together with OpenStreetMap, we supplement each other.
Romaine
Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Hello,
Apart from the politics side and the end-of-the-world aspects there are good points raised.
Right now there are some services based on the google map, mainly the map itself, panoramio which puts images on map, routing engine calculates directions, and several other layers exists on the map.
There is open content map: OSM. Image collections with geoinformation exists, like Commons. Routing exists like YOURS, or graphhopper. Geocoded wikipedia articles exist, and possibly several open geocoded contents as well.
There is a point to bring these together and WMF have the resources (both monetary and hardware-wise) to make it done. All the open-source tools exist, WMF have the resources to host a tile server (or better yet a vector tile server), we already host Commons, so it's well possible to provide such a community-based resource.
Possibly the largest task would be to make an exceptionally good and future-proof plan of all of these. Google made it wise, they are pretty modular so they can insert new services easily. We can do that, we are more numerous. ;-) With a good API it's possible to get together something like goog earth where people can use provided layers as well as insert new ones for themselves form the layer-collections.
I personally would like to see geocoded commons images to appear on a map to be able to use it instead of panoramio (even if I see the vast problems with commons and the assurance of free and useful images; it's hard to say how useful is an image of a field, hill or some streets).
IMHO.
Bear in mind that OSM is a community such as we are, with its own habits and ideas. The idea of OSM is to have everything in one databse which structure is very open. You can actually put there almost everything which can be connected with the points, lines or areas and exist on our mother Earth. See:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Map_Features
You can also propose a new features to be added to the official OSM database schema. It is disussed by OSM community in similar way as a new ideas in Wikipedia.
OSM has actually its own API which is free to use:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/API_v0.6
It can be used both for creating new tools for editing of OSM as we as creating new functionalities based on OSM data.
2013/8/25 Peter Gervai grinapo@gmail.com:
Hello,
Apart from the politics side and the end-of-the-world aspects there are good points raised.
Right now there are some services based on the google map, mainly the map itself, panoramio which puts images on map, routing engine calculates directions, and several other layers exists on the map.
There is open content map: OSM. Image collections with geoinformation exists, like Commons. Routing exists like YOURS, or graphhopper. Geocoded wikipedia articles exist, and possibly several open geocoded contents as well.
There is a point to bring these together and WMF have the resources (both monetary and hardware-wise) to make it done. All the open-source tools exist, WMF have the resources to host a tile server (or better yet a vector tile server), we already host Commons, so it's well possible to provide such a community-based resource.
Possibly the largest task would be to make an exceptionally good and future-proof plan of all of these. Google made it wise, they are pretty modular so they can insert new services easily. We can do that, we are more numerous. ;-) With a good API it's possible to get together something like goog earth where people can use provided layers as well as insert new ones for themselves form the layer-collections.
I personally would like to see geocoded commons images to appear on a map to be able to use it instead of panoramio (even if I see the vast problems with commons and the assurance of free and useful images; it's hard to say how useful is an image of a field, hill or some streets).
IMHO.
-- byte-byte, grin
Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
On 25.08.2013 11:58, Tomasz Ganicz wrote:
Bear in mind that OSM is a community such as we are, with its own habits and ideas. The idea of OSM is to have everything in one databse which structure is very open. You can actually put there almost everything which can be connected with the points, lines or areas and exist on our mother Earth. See:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Map_Features
You can also propose a new features to be added to the official OSM database schema. It is disussed by OSM community in similar way as a new ideas in Wikipedia.
OSM has actually its own API which is free to use:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/API_v0.6
It can be used both for creating new tools for editing of OSM as we as creating new functionalities based on OSM data.
Allow me a stupid question on this thread, but why is the existing OSM-based solution employed by several language versions of Wikivoyage not good enough?
Cheers Yaroslav
On Sun, Aug 25, 2013 at 11:58 AM, Tomasz Ganicz polimerek@gmail.com wrote:
Bear in mind that OSM is a community such as we are, with its own habits and ideas.
As I happen to be one of the more active ones in Hungary. :-)
The idea of OSM is to have everything in one databse
Nope. You will not see there wikipedia articles or photos. ;-) What you may see are pointers to external resources, but many of these resources doesn't exist (like something similar to panoramio which hosts geocoded images in vast amounts).
You can also propose a new features to be added to the official OSM database schema.
It is not a question of OSM database, it's a question of services based on the database, especially those related to slippy map with mapped external content. OSMF doesn't have the resources to get this done, and they even struggle under the load of their tile server being used by the general public. In fact you're advised against using their tile server and you are advised to create one for your own. For example this is one point where WMF _may_ be able to help, but it's a high demand service.
OSM has actually its own API which is free to use:
I do not think Wikipedia should get deeply involved in _editing_ the db and firing shitloads of queries at the API will surely help Wikipedia getting banned from using it. ;-) Whatever we do it should be based on the minute diffs and our own processing. But really I do not talk about the db, I talk about it's representation (tiles) and it's interface (slippy map with additional geocoded layers).
g
On 25 August 2013 21:45, Peter Gervai grinapo@gmail.com wrote:
this is one point where WMF _may_ be able to help,
We already have Special:Nearby https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Nearby It shouldn't be a great leap to make (the back end of) that page emit a KML file (it's a list of geocoded articles, after all) and pass them to Google., or indeed another KML-compatible service.
On 25 August 2013 23:33, Andy Mabbett andy@pigsonthewing.org.uk wrote:
this is one point where WMF _may_ be able to help,
We already have Special:Nearby
I've started a discussion on en.Wikipedia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Village_pump_(technical)#Nearby_.26_r...
Please feel free to point to it from a suitable page on Meta, or elsewhere
On 24 August 2013 23:21, Romaine Wiki romaine_wiki@yahoo.com wrote:
Google is throwing the Wikipedia layer out of Google Maps under the guise of "improvement"
If true, that's very sad. I was involved in liason with Google to get that set up to use {{Coord}}, some years ago, and people I've showed it to have always found it useful. The problem is, Google kept it hidden away, so I wouldn't be surprised if stats showed that people didn't use it much - at least not as much as they might have done.
Considering this for finding a Wikipedia layer on maps, I do not know any. But I do know there is an open source alternative, just like Wikipedia, but then for maps, OpenStreetMap.
OSM won't do something like that, but invite others (which might be WMF or our community) to use their data to create such services.
In fact, Kolossos has done so:
http://toolserver.org/~kolossos/openlayers/kml-on-ol.php?lat=51.52214&lo...
but that seems to be using an out-of-date or otherwise in complete data set - even so, switch (under "Optionen") to English (for greatest coverage) or your language of choice.
Incidentally, when mapping on OSM, it's always a good idea to include a Wikipedia (or Wikidata) link for eligible objects.
On 25 August 2013 18:39, Andy Mabbett andy@pigsonthewing.org.uk wrote:
Considering this for finding a Wikipedia layer on maps, I do not know any. But I do know there is an open source alternative, just like Wikipedia, but then for maps, OpenStreetMap.
OSM won't do something like that, but invite others (which might be WMF or our community) to use their data to create such services.
In fact, Kolossos has done so:
http://toolserver.org/~kolossos/openlayers/kml-on-ol.php?lat=51.52214&lo...
but that seems to be using an out-of-date or otherwise in complete data set - even so, switch (under "Optionen") to English (for greatest coverage) or your language of choice.
[l'll move over to that maps list, but only fair to post this correction here]
Kolossos has provided a better URL for his tools, which is up-to-date, and very impressive:
http://toolserver.org/~kolossos/openlayers/kml-on-ol.php?lat=51.52214&lo...
wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org