Jens-
wasn't hard, just one call to ImageMagick's
composite. The first version
of the code used an icon below the image, like e.g. at
http://www.spiegel.de/wissenschaft/weltraum/0,1518,280633,00.html
I like that much better.
tarquin said he wouldn't like an icon but prefer
text. Any opinions?
With the [edit] and the [hide/show] links, I think we could really do with
an icon here and there. The mangifying glass is almost universally
recognized, and an ALT and TITLE tag could be further used to convey the
meaning.
If we'd use an icon, anyone has a nice one?
A friend of mine made this:
http://scireview.de/be/i2.gif
(looks best on a dark background.)
Specifying width for thumbnails is not hard to do. Do
we want to have this
from a "corporate identity" point of view?
I think so -- it's most important that individual pages are consistent,
not that the entire project maintains a single layout standard. Having
flexibility here avoids situation where text becomes unreadable and a page
is not understood because the explanatory image is too small.
I had the vision of the image page containing much
more info/text than
the caption, and the caption might be different for different articles.
(say, Leopard.jpg being linked from [[Leopard]] and [[Predator]])
Yes, what I meant is that in cases where this is -not- true, I would like
to be optionally able to transclude the caption from the image page (e.g.
"|loadcaption"). Right now we have a lot of image pages that are redundant
with the pages that include them; furthermore, showing the image page
content this way would increase the visibility of this text, which is
often neglected.
The image page layout is an issue, though. Currently,
it's mostly used to
state the copyright status of an image. Options:
* Have a separate "Show big picture and nice caption" page, having an
own article in a separate namespace
That would be confusing, because some people might never figure out the
difference between the two types of image pages. Could lead to "Why am I
here?" reactions.
* Add a new field to the table, 'caption',
that's used as a caption, the
current field will be used for copyright status. Upload page should ask
for "Copyright status" in a new field, perhaps assisted by a drop down
box containing predefined values like "Pre 1920", "PD since from US
gov",
"Took the photo myself and release it to the GFDL", "... the PD".
And make this meta data available on a separate page or (maybe user
option) at the images pages bottom.
I think that we only need an additional integer field for the copyright
status, and one of the status values would be "see caption". For complex
cases, having the explanation in the (extended) caption seems appropriate
to me.
We have many photos that neither state their source
nor what they show.
That's very true. Even for fair use, at the very least the source should
be stated.
Regards,
Erik
