1 Sep 2003 01:15
1 Sep 2003 03:32
software for making maps
This software is used to make maps like those on
http://meta.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_first_useful_map
http://meta.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_polygon_map
It's not all the software I have here.
Queries in city names database are being made separately,
here only "cities2.pl" with cities for the first useful map is attached.
This software needs:
* absolutely most recent version of ImageMagick (5.5.7-10)
5.5.7-9 is not recent enough, it contains very serious bug
* Ruby and RMagick
* Geo::E00 (attached)
And data:
* NASA's BlueMarble (raster background)
ftp://mitch.gsfc.nasa.gov:21/pub/stockli/bluemarble/
* CIA World DataBank II in text format (rivers)
http://www.evl.uic.edu/pape/data/WDB/
* UNEP/GRID data (boundaries / polygons)
http://www.grid.unep.ch/data/grid/gnv19.php
I'm not terribly certain about copyright status of this.
If it's bad, we always have 1988 free data and
only a couple of borders to digitalize.
It should be possible to run it without BlueMarble
or rivers data if these features aren't used.
Boundary data is necessary.
(Continue reading)
1 Sep 2003 03:33
Re: Sysop ability to ban logged in users; Undelete bug fixed
Brion Vibber wrote: > The Cunctator wrote: > >> I assume that sysops can be banned through this interface as well. >> > Yes; one sysop having fun could ban all other existing user accounts and > finally him/herself. That would be a pretty silly thing to do, though. Tsk tsk, don't you people read? ;) I said: :As usual, these automatically generated entries, and the original :username entries, can be unblocked by any sysop (even blocked sysops). Blocking by username or IP address only stops the user from editing pages, it does not stop them from blocking or unblocking people. Mav has been known to block himself at times, in an attempt to discourage himself from wasting all his time on this rather addictive website. Now he'll be able to block himself by username, he won't have to go to the trouble of looking up his IP address. >> The >> hack sounds pretty ugly. Banning by username should be done by banning >> through the login (i.e. the cookies) not by checking IP. >> > > Username banning bans the username only, or rather it _did_. (There was > no user interface for doing it, so sysops could not do so.) > > Since it's trivial to log out and make a new account, Tim's patch also > adds a check for the IP address when the banned user next tries to edit(Continue reading)
1 Sep 2003 02:36
Re: Re: Sysop ability to ban logged in users; Undelete bug fixed
Tim Starling wrote: > Brion Vibber wrote: > >> So all one has to do is log out _and_ change IP addresses. (A few >> seconds, click a couple buttons for many people with dynamic IPs.) >> Create a new account name under the new IP, and go wild. > > > I don't think most vandals would know how to change their IP address > easily. But even if they did, this modification makes things much > harder for them, and much easier for us. Well, this whole issue is over A Certain Person who exploits the current system by creating multiple accounts and frequently changing IPs, exactly the situation that can most easily get around this. >> One might gain a slight additional protection by setting a "you're >> banned" note in the session data or a separate cookie instead of (or >> in addition to) banning the IP. The bannee could clear their cookies >> or restart their brower to clear it. > > > That's possible, but I'm happy to wait and see how effective the > current measures are. Banning with cookies could cause problems for > Internet cafes, because it would be difficult to lift the ban after a > complaint. The cookie or session variable could store a random-generated ID number which could sit in ipblocks and be displayed in the "you're blocked"(Continue reading)
1 Sep 2003 04:13
Re: [WikiEN-l] Re: Undeletions
Brion- > I've added a more convenient link into the undeletion system, which will > show in bold at the top of the page when viewing a page which has been > deleted (if you're a sysop). I'm not sure what the point of this is. Now I get lots of annoying messages on pages that have at some point been created as an experiment and later been re-created as a real page. In virtually all of these cases I don't want to restore the deleted revisions. The very few cases in which there might be something useful accidentally deleted do not IMHO justify enabling this for all 100+ sysops and not making it configurable. Can we disable this by default and make it a preference? Otherwise people will probably start restoring junk revisions just to get rid of the messages. This is particularly problematic since the deleted revisions info looks just like the "new messages" info and is in the same place. I know the intent is to standardize style, but it reduces usability, as it makes the much less common but more important talk page notification easier to miss. Regards, Erik
1 Sep 2003 04:14
1 Sep 2003 03:11
Re: [WikiEN-l] Re: Undeletions
Erik Moeller wrote: >Brion- > > >>I've added a more convenient link into the undeletion system, which will >>show in bold at the top of the page when viewing a page which has been >>deleted (if you're a sysop). >> >> > >I'm not sure what the point of this is. > To make it actually possible for human beings to get into the undeletion system? Naw, screw humans. They just make trouble for the machine collective! :) > Now I get lots of annoying >messages on pages that have at some point been created as an experiment >and later been re-created as a real page. > So far one compliment vs one complaint. About usual. :) If we had a decent deletion log table, it would be a trivial matter to only display the bold notice for recently deleted pages, and for the rest just have a boring note down at the bottom and/or an "Undelete" link in the sidebar.(Continue reading)
1 Sep 2003 05:30
Hey, if it's on your credit card, do you need permission? -_^
-- Toby
1 Sep 2003 04:48
Re: [WikiEN-l] Re: Undeletions
Tim Starling wrote: > I agree with Erik that it looks too much like the "you have new message" > notification. But it's certainly a useful feature and I think it would > be a pity to force people disable it for aesthetic reasons. I think if > it was not bold, it would blend in to the other top links and you'd > barely notice it unless you were looking for it. Plus it would look like > "delete this page" and "protect this page", so it would be reasonably > consistent also. Fair enough. For the moment I've dropped the <strong> but left it otherwise intact. (I also fixed it so it produced a correct link on pages in namespaces. Oops!) -- brion vibber (brion <at> pobox.com)
1 Sep 2003 06:31
Re: [Wikitech-l] Re: Re: Undeletions
Brion- > To make it actually possible for human beings to get into the undeletion > system? Many months ago I made myself a little custom keyword for undeleting pages: http://www.mozilla.org/docs/end-user/keywords.html When I want to do so, I just type "und page_name". While this is a hack and you are correct that a proper action log table and a redesigned undeletion interface would be preferable, I do not see the information that deleted revisions exist as so useful as to have it on all pages, primarily because there's simply a fairly large number of pages which have been experimentally created at one point, deleted, and recreated. How about displaying it in the top bar only for non-existing pages, and otherwise displaying it only on "Page history"? This should also reduce the number of checks in the ARCHIVE table needed. Regards, Erik
RSS Feed