User talk:Skippern

From OpenStreetMap Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search

Contents

Discussão

Olá Skippern,

Criei uma lista de discussão para facilitar a comunicação entre os usuários do Brasil.

Para se cadastrar, entre aqui. -Vgeorge- 9 September 2008

Obrigado --Skippern 01:10, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

Relações

So inicio trabalha com Relações no Brasil. --Skippern 13:03, 2 December 2008 (UTC)


Hires data for Brazil

When I see all the Y! hires data in Brazil I get the impression that you need more mappers ;-) --katpatuka 08:59, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

You are right about that, I am trying my best to fill in data with a focus on Espírito Santo, but I also do other places (as now I do some Yahoo tracing in Niterói). Apriciate all the aid that we get here, please help spread the word. --Skippern 10:41, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

multipoligon

Hej!

Det verkar som om du har taggat relationer med type=multipoligon, är det meningen eller är det bara en Portugisisk felstavning?

http://openstreetmap.org/browse/relation/54019 http://openstreetmap.org/browse/relation/54026 http://openstreetmap.org/browse/relation/54027 http://openstreetmap.org/browse/relation/54242 http://openstreetmap.org/browse/relation/55524 http://openstreetmap.org/browse/relation/57142 http://openstreetmap.org/browse/relation/59886


Erik Johansson 02:05, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

Den feilen stammer nok fra JOSM, jeg fikk opp en rekke multipolygoner merket som feil, og saa etter hvordan jeg kunne rette dem, det virket som om feilen forsvant ved aa stave multipoligon, vet ikke om det var en bug eller hva. --Skippern 14:26, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

Kontakt...

Kan du kontakt meg via OSM talk-siden http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Gustav%20Foseid eller e-postadressen på http://www.foseid.priv.no/gustav/kontakt.html ? -- Gustavf 20:22, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

About the wetlands discussion

Thanks for pointing me to that page, I didn’t consider it as related at first, there are crosscutting concerns, right !

But «see natural=wetland» ? What is this supposed to mean for me ? Please discuss a little further. --Pshunter 22:17, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

It did what it was supposed to do, enlighten you on the point of wetland. --Skippern 11:02, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Sandboxes

Languages template

What's the idea of adding {{Languages|}} template to About, Help:Contents, Browsing, Editing etc ? Are you planning to remove the existing language links? At the moment there's two sets of links on these pages -- Harry Wood 09:38, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, thats the idea, but it turned out to be a little more work than I had imagined, so until I get to do the same in the various translations of the pages I let the two languages templates stay. I am also doing this from work, so I can do some bulk work at times and than suddenly it can be a couple of days to next chance. --Skippern 11:11, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

OSM Diary links

Walking Papers

Walking Papers

power_rating

H Skippern, power_output is not a loose translation for what is wanted here - it's just physically incorrect. It's a bit like saying: my photovoltaic power plant had a power output of 5 kW today ... I can't say if that should mean 5 kWh this day or maybe the maximum power output was 5 kW or maybe the average power output of the sunshine hours was 5 kW, which may all fit to a photovoltaic plant of a size of about 1 kW rated power (which is mostly referenced as 1 kWp)--we want to replace power_output because the latter one is physically simply wrong. So I don't understand your denial ... -- Schusch 22:02, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

Proposal which may be iteresting for you

Please have a look at this proposal Relations/Proposed/Region. It has many elements which are similar to Relations/Proposed/Is In which you were interested in some time ago. Hava a nice day --Jakubt 20:33, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

Relation:region discussion

I am not exactly sure if I got your proposal at Talk:Relations/Proposed/Region. Could you clarify it for me? (Sorry for my bad english). --Jakubt 21:54, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

Vote for petting zoo

Hi there. Thanks for voting on my Proposed features/petting zoo proposal. You write that you oppose the proposal because you would like to see zoo=*. If you read through the other votes, you'll see that we all agree on that, and that this is actually what'll be resulting from the proposal.

With 7 out of 8 people voting to accept the proposal, your vote could mean acceptance of the proposal. Would you be so kind to change your vote to an "accept" if I promise to use zoo=*?

Cheers, sybren 09:31, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

Why Brasil to Brazil switching? It is wrong.

There was, as far as I could see, inconsistency among users of Template:pt-br:place in this parameter; there might be consistency among the WikiProject page set, but apparently not beyond this. I sought to standardize on 'Brazil'. The 'Brasil' value can be enforced at the template-mechanics level using a 'switch' parameter. I would suggest that value standards be included in the template documentation, or in cross-reference from the template to a section of 'internationalization' which addresses when, where and why to use "non-English" (if one wants to call them that) values. My goal was in standardization and not in imposing a personal preference.

Another word so we're on the same page. Folks sometimes assume that 'standardisation' is British/European and 'standardization' is American. My understanding is that this is a false distinction and 'standardization' is quite acceptable in the British/European spelling standard. I used to have a reference for this, but don't have it at hand right now.

(P.S. I tend not to watch user talk pages; please toss a response on my talk page, preferably with a thread cross-reference here. Thanks.)

Regards, Ceyockey 14:50, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

The inconsistency you refere to in the portuguese pages is probably that many/some of these pages was created in english and translated to portuguese when adding the pt-br template. In this case, all usages of Brazil should be assumed wrong and changed to Brasil. --Skippern 16:05, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
OK. I will go back and reverse my prior edits and take a look at other instances of the pt-br:place transclusion. I've added to the suggested template revisions @ Template talk:Pt-br:place based on this exchange. --Ceyockey 01:29, 29 November 2009 (UTC)
I've also removed the soft-redirect template from Category:Brasil which referred to Category:Brazil as the 'correct' category. --Ceyockey 01:41, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

I've added a section to Template talk:Pt-br:place which speaks to a broader namespace question underlying the 'Brasil' vs. 'Brazil' choice. --Ceyockey 02:46, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

Stubs

Check Category:Tag stubs and Category:Key stubs to find lists of stubs that need filling in. Translate them to your own languages while you at it.

Are all of them long enough to be considered stubs? Why not wikipedia:WP:STUB? "A stub is an article containing only a few sentences of text which is too short to provide encyclopedic coverage of a subject, but not so short as to provide no useful information." --goldfndr 11:56, 13 January 2010 (UTC)
Well I started a process where my plan was to add Template:ValueDescription and Template:KeyDescription on all pages, and give a brief description where I am able, and at the same time ask for assistance on describing the pages where they existed in other languages than English. I managed 13 pages translated to English this way (from Finnish, German and Italian). I am also in the same process trying to translate important features to Portuguese.
This entire process took more time and effort than I had planned, and now also are very busy preparing the Vitória import, but I will continue with the stubs until as many as possible of them are described. IMO all keys and tags should be described in English, so that they can be translated to any language. --Skippern 12:13, 13 January 2010 (UTC)
Ah, I'm elated to read that you are planning to follow through with ValueDescription, as linking to OSMdoc/Tagstat/Tagwatch seemed to be the only possibly worthwhile improvement over relying on their Key pages if the description was identical and their Key pages were translated. Any possibility I could persuade you not to create more tag stubs if they don't have this template? That is, if you aren't already persuaded of that. Was there a published deadline for creating tag stubs? --goldfndr 13:03, 13 January 2010 (UTC)
I think I have created all the necessary pages, I now just need time to get all those ValueDescription and KeyDescription in place. If we say that no more stubs will be created until this bulk edit is completed? That means that all stubs should have at least the description template in place. --Skippern 11:07, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

{{tag|key|yes}} vs {{tag|key||yes}}

Your input desired at Talk:Wiki guidelines. --goldfndr 11:56, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

shop=travel_agency -> shop=travel

Looks shop=travel_agency as a shop selling travel agency. I think it is better change to shop=travel. --Calibrator 08:30, 14 February 2010 (UTC)

cep=*

Expect of using cep=* please use postal_code=*... Like your work on OSM anyway, keep it up! Obrigado :-) --Deltabrasil 22:26, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

My JOSM preset

I am working on a draft JOSM preset based on INT-1. It might be full of errors, but if you would like to test it out, check it here. I'll look into having it included in JOSM's list of presets when I have a more agile and complete version. [1] Check it out --Skippern 23:26, 2 July 2011 (BST)

MapCSS

I have started experimenting with MapCSS, firstly as a paintstyle/renderer for JOSM, but also in time see if I can have my own map rendering rules for creating tiles. [2] --Skippern 23:58, 2 July 2011 (BST)

Tag:geological=outcrop

Hi, your prose in Tag:geological=outcrop is not clear: maybe an accidental cut/paste? Could you reformulate please? Thanks! Damouns 09:26, 18 January 2012 (UTC)

It is cut/paste from Key:geological, and I would love to see someone document this tag further. IMO red links should not occur on Map features, especially not on tags that might require specialist knowledge within a field. --Skippern 17:09, 18 January 2012 (UTC)
User:Alv seems to have corrected your sentence, it was just a matter of formulation, because the sentence in Key:geological is correct. As I said you had perhaps made an error in your copy/paste. Thanks anyway. Damouns 08:02, 19 January 2012 (UTC)
Retrieved from "http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User_talk:Skippern"
Personal tools
Namespaces
Variants
Actions
site
Toolbox