[Foundation-l] when uploading pictures to commons ....
Walter van Kalken
walter at vankalken.net
Mon Dec 18 13:36:35 UTC 2006
Brianna Laugher wrote:
>On 19/12/06, Walter van Kalken <walter at vankalken.net> wrote:
>>That is not the point.
>>IS there nobody here who understands that we make this project for all
>>the people out there! Not to satisfy our own geekly lust to pursue the
>>latest fashion in computerelectronics and programming.
>I am not in favour of bleeding edge technology for its own sake, but
>the reason this file is so large is because of the detail in it. I
>don't see how that can be reduced without reducing quality.
>There are links on that page to a PNG and a simpler SVG. These are
>ways to make it accessible for all without sacrificing quality.
Yes and now here is the catch. The graphic is all over wikipedia
already. Like in nl.wikipedia on the India page as a thumbnail. Now
someone clicks on it and is immediately taken to the original huge .svg
file which crashes firefox 2 about 50% of the times and IE doesn't seem
to be able to open it at all.
You see Briana they are not taken to that page on commons with the
description file. Which might mean they wouldn't get in any kind of
trouble. But they are taken, after clicking, to that monster file
And like I said before, the thumb is useless if you cannot view the
original. Now there is a .png which is just as detailed it seems. But
since there is an effort going on wikimediawide to replace all .png's
with .svg's this means trouble for most internetusers!
Why don't we do it the other way around. Put the .png versions on the
pages in the projects, with a link to the .svg versions. You see ,png
any browser can open without problems. Why must we always be the first?
More information about the foundation-l