Template talk:Software/Archive

From OpenStreetMap Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Description word wrap

Currently the description is shown without any line break. This looks weird for long description. E.g., take a look at MoNav. Should I shorten the description? --ChristianVetter 09:36, 25 October 2010 (BST)

In my opinion, the template box content should automatically wrap at word boundaries. The description field is supposed to be used in different contexts, not only the boxes, so manual newlines aren't an ideal solution. However, I'm not sure how the templates would need to be modified to achieve this. --Tordanik 13:31, 25 October 2010 (BST)
Sorry I have no clue how to fix it ATM. But I see your point, I will see --!i! 13:59, 25 October 2010 (BST)
Yes I fixed the bug by setting a table width of 1/4 of the page :) --!i! 18:11, 25 October 2010 (BST)

license vs. price

I've noticed that the template combines a software's price and license into a single parameter. Is that intentional? It can confuse people not familiar with Open Source licenses, for whom "free" might sound more appealing than "GPL", "BSD" or $other_scary_acronym. It also makes it hard to represent the occasionally observed practice where developers offer their Open Source software for a non-zero price on platforms that have a centralized software distribution platform (such as iPhones) - I don't know whether someone in the OSM ecosystem actually does this, though. --Tordanik 11:09, 21 August 2010 (BST)

That's true but I think the license is important and maybee the price, too. So splitting up into a price=free;45€;23$ and a license=free;commercial;GPL;... attribute?--!i! 21:23, 21 August 2010 (BST)
Yes, I'd suggest to split it into two fields, such as price=free;45€;23$ and license=proprietary;GPL;... --Tordanik 18:12, 22 August 2010 (BST)
OK I will do so for the new ones and try to convert the recent ones :) --!i! 07:39, 23 August 2010 (BST)

Suggestions for improving the template

While writing the rules for parsing the template, I've encountered some possibilities for impoving the template described in the subsections below. --Tordanik 22:59, 25 August 2010 (BST)

Parameter names

I'd consider renaming a few parameters:

  • profils -> profiles (typo)
  • customIntervall -> customInterval (typo)
  • FastWayPointAdding -> fastWayPointAdding (lowercase first letter for consistency)
  • showAltitude -> showAltitudeDiagram (if it's supposed the same as the current column "Show altitude diagram")
  • rotate -> rotateMap ("rotate" is very vague)
  • upload -> uploadOSMData (ambiguous because there are many other types of uploads)
  • data -> mapData (ambiguous; a router might use vector data for roads, but raster data for map display)
  • ...Mode -> ? (see below)

The problem with changes like this is that it affects existing uses of the template, so we should probably discuss them before changing anything. We might even be able to automate this. --Tordanik 22:59, 25 August 2010 (BST)

Yes you are right! Can you change it using a script or do we have to do it manualy? --!i! 15:57, 26 August 2010 (BST)
I can probably script this, but I don't know how long it will take. I should probably try to deal with the license/cost issue, too, while I'm at it. Meanwhile, it would be a good idea to use the new parameters for new template calls already - otherwise, we'll need to update even more pages. --Tordanik 19:18, 26 August 2010 (BST)
Ok I will update the example and use the new ones. --!i! 21:41, 26 August 2010 (BST)

Accessibilty related modes

"pedestrianMode" (and other "accessibility related" modes) appear to overlap with profiles=foot/..., and there is nothing in the field name to show that it's accessibility related. I'm not sure what to do with them, though. --Tordanik 22:59, 25 August 2010 (BST)

OK lets remove it, I never used/understood this one ;) --!i! 15:57, 26 August 2010 (BST)

Missing information

Some information that is part of the tables on Software/Mobile isn't represented by the template and can therefore not be extracted:

  • (map display) Map generator
  • (navigating) Upload GPX to OSM
  • (accessibility) Screenreader for Platform
  • (accessibility) Languages for Screenreaders
  • (editing) Create ways
  • (editing) Create osm files for offline editing

We can, of course, decide to leave some of these out intentionally. --Tordanik 22:59, 25 August 2010 (BST)

Well I agree but what are possible values for Map generator or Screenreader ?

Comments

There currently is a comment section in the last column of each table. They actually contain information that cannot easily be expressed by the other columns, so it might be a good idea to keep them. The easiest way to do so would be adding mapDisplayComment/navigatingComment/trackingComment/... fields to the template, but I'm not sure whether that's the best choice. --Tordanik 22:59, 25 August 2010 (BST)

I don't see your point, so what is the problem with the current description (ok comment would be better) attribute? Why to splitup? Detailed informations are shown on the seperated tool pages? --!i! 15:57, 26 August 2010 (BST)
I'm not suggesting to change "description" to "comment". What I'm talking about are the "Comment" columns of, say, Software/Mobile_phones#Navigating_features. "Bike routing and turn-by-turn navigation based on roadbooks of Bike GPS Rich Tracks." "The street-level view is vector-based, but zooming out switches to OSM bitmaps if found in the map package." Where would you add that information? --Tordanik 19:33, 26 August 2010 (BST)
Well don't you think they will fit in the single description property? We can get enough space if we format it using <small> and shrink the rest of the table. But this details are more something for the toolpages, or? --!i! 21:40, 26 August 2010 (BST)
Information that refers to one of the columns that isn't part of the general overview shouldn't be part of the description. The problem is that sometimes neither "yes" nor "no" is true for a yes/no column, so a "yes, but ..." could be useful. But well, we'll probably be able to live without these additional comments. They would make column arrangement rather inflexible anyway. --Tordanik 22:16, 5 September 2010 (BST)
Yes if we add further infos here we get problems with a good table layout cuase we cant estimate the width of the columns. So therefore is the single description column or the software page itself--!i! 07:25, 6 September 2010 (BST)

Clarify adding new software entries

The Android page has a banner saying "This page will be changed to a bot generated list layout. Please provide your new informations on a seperated page using template:Software2.". Aside from the two misspellings that may make some cringe, where exactly am I supposed to add "informations" about new software? On what "seperated" page? Can new users be pointed to the naming convention for these pages (/MyMapApp vs. /Software/Platform/MyMapApp?)? -- Dandv 21:51, 24 September 2010 (BST)

Hi Dandv, excuse me for the typos, caused by to much work in to less time ;) The users can create a new page anywhere they like, we were pleased to keep the hirachy flat to simplify linking etc. Feel free to addapt the labels (one at each Software subpage) to express it in a better way :) --!i! 07:29, 25 September 2010 (BST)

Bug: Software/Desktop list mobile software also

In Software/Desktop page the General information table is correct, but other tables list all software, not only the desktop applications. --City-busz 16:06, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

You are right, thanks for spotting this error. You can fix it yourself: Just add the |platform=.*(?:win/linux/mac).* filter that is in the SoftwareTable template below the General information table at the end of all other SoftwareTable templates on that page, too. (And wait for the next bot run.) --Tordanik 16:27, 5 November 2010 (UTC)
I've fixed it. Thanks for the solution. --City-busz 18:04, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

Bug in this template?

Hi,

It looks to me as if this template has two parameters named formats. MediaWiki does not like that and reports a lot of the pages using this template at Category:Pages using duplicate arguments in template calls. This is not just an issue about error lists, but the parser also issues a warning and states that it will ignore the first argument.

I would suggest to rename them to trackFormat and rendererFormat. --Tigerfell This user is member of the wiki team of OSM (Let's talk) 19:55, 19 September 2018 (UTC)

Having two parameters with the same name is indeed a bad idea and I support renaming them. I have a slight preference for calling the second one rendererOutputFormats, as that would be more precise. --Tordanik 19:26, 21 September 2018 (UTC)

I am okay with your suggestion. If no one speaks up I will change it by the weekend. --Tigerfell This user is member of the wiki team of OSM (Let's talk) 18:15, 26 September 2018 (UTC)

☑Y Done, I hope I got every page. --Tigerfell This user is member of the wiki team of OSM (Let's talk) 13:13, 29 September 2018 (UTC)

MicrosoftAppID field outdated

Resolved: All applicable usages of the legacy app IDs have been updated to the current Microsoft Store IDs.

As microsoft phones are no longer supported the links to the mobile store do not work anymore. There is a new microsoft app store though, but as far as I can tell the IDs have changed. Should the old MicrosoftAppID field be kept and overwritten with the new IDs or should we simply delete that field? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pbnoxious (talk • contribs) 14:58, 14. May 2020

I'd prefer it to be deleted. --Nw520 (talk) 09:11, 15 May 2020 (UTC)
I disagree, apps on the Microsoft Store aren't just for mobile and many are also for desktop. --Mxdanger (talk) 22:10, 24 March 2021 (UTC)
You could add a warning box to pages with the parameter set saying that MicrosoftAppID is out of date and the rest of the page should be checked for being current. --Andrew (talk) 11:53, 15 May 2020 (UTC)
I've gone ahead and updated the template with the new URL scheme, along with updating every page to use the new IDs. --Mxdanger (talk) 22:10, 24 March 2021 (UTC)

What if we had similar template not for users but for software developers?

Right now they have to deal with messy category Category:Programming_Languages. Can we resolve this problem using similar template? Xxzme (talk) 16:13, 17 January 2015 (UTC)

Can you plz. explain the usecase a bit more? Are we talking about a summary as in Frameworks for example? --!i! This user is member of the wiki team of OSM 10:54, 18 January 2015 (UTC)
We need to categorize frameworks, libraries by their language and by their purpose.
For example there Category:Java with Osmosis, but Osmosis is Category:OSM_processing tool.
Similar with Photon in Category:Geocoding, this is geocoder in java language.
You can observe nested categories like this in Category:Feature_descriptions (first you see category about Key/Relation/Tag), then in Category:Key_descriptions (you see category about group/language/status).
We need tables Geocoding libraries in Java language, and category Category:Geocoding libraries (target audience are programmers, not users)
Is this more clear now? Xxzme (talk) 14:29, 18 January 2015 (UTC)

Archiving as unclear suggestion from banned user Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 18:31, 18 March 2022 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Template_talk:Software/Archive&oldid=2290817"