From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Hi! Welcome to Wikipedia. I'm curious, why are you going through all the Stargate articles adjusting the templates? Didn't they work fine before? --Tango (talk) 23:35, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
- Hey! Sorry, I edited the articles first to prevent any redlinks after editing the {{sgcite}} template itself. You caught me before I could go over to the project page and explain myself :-) I've just added to the talk page though Chris (talk) 00:50, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Old Turkic letter
I see you converted some of the Old Turkic letter from png to svg, good job however you forgot to remove the {{ShouldBeSVG|Alphabet}} template from the original png image.
[edit] SVG obsession
Why PNG images need to be converted into SVG? I can start editing PNG images instantly from Microsoft Paint. Its resolution is higher and the file size is smaller in comparison to SVG. For instance, this derivative SVG image is 26 times larger than the original PNG image I uploaded. it means the web page loaded quicker with a PNG than with a SVG as now.
It is better to confine SVG versions to Commons and not replace each and every article with it. Else, each page is load slower and slower. Anwar (talk) 12:08, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
- How do I view a SVG image anyway? I downloaded your SVG version of the above map. But I cannot see it (except on the web site of Wikipedia). Should I install additional software?Anwar (talk) 13:56, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
- So, are you telling me that I should convert all PNG maps to SVG in the future as someone will anyway do it regardless of file size/pixel resolution optimisation.Anwar (talk) 14:10, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
- I just downloaded Inkscape. It is scalable indeed to practically any resolution. But I am such a stickler to speed that the very idea of switching, to a 1MB file when a 30KB version is available, tantamounts to blasphemy.Anwar (talk) 14:59, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
- Also, I don't feel comfortable with people replacing PNG with SVG in articles. It is a sure prescription for traffic jam for the 684 million visitors to wikipedia.org annually. PNG was specifically developed for the Internet and handheld device markets. SVG was developed specifically for the advertising print media market.Anwar (talk) 19:50, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Optimisation gives speed for SVG
There is one more issue. Is anyone actually checking if the SVG versions are optimised. For instance, check this SVG out. It is half the size of the original PNG image I uploaded. I reused all objects. Hence the small file size. But many SVG images I see in Commons are so huge they cannot be used efficiently.Anwar (talk) 22:08, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Optimisation saves space for Commons
I think you're missing the point. When you upload SVG images to wikimedia projects, the thumnails used in articles and displayed on the image page are PNG images generated from the SVG by a renderer. The 1MB SVG image isn't used in articles at all, the 800px PNG render of the SVG map is only 76kb compared to your original of 86kb. However, I could download the SVG map, recolour the countries, relocate the dots and move the key in a matter of minutes and re-upload and the new PNG would still be only ~76kb but that kind of change is impossible or incredibly time consuming with the original PNG only.
- Yes, but it means the SVG image stored in the Commons is still 1MB. Suppose, the storage space available for Commons is only 1TB. It means, only 1 million SVG images. If they are optimised (by object re-use), atleast 10 million SVG images in the Commons.Anwar (talk) 11:11, 11 April 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Signpost updated for April 21st, 2008.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 16:23, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Signpost updated for May 2nd and 9th, 2008.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 06:23, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Signpost updated for May 12th, 2008.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 09:27, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Signpost updated for May 19th and 26th, 2008.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 07:14, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Signpost updated for June 2, 2008.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 07:34, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
