Talk:BSicon/Categorization

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search
See here also other discussions about BSicons, or expand:
Main talk:
“Gallery” talk:
Category talk:

.../parallel railways/uw/double

[edit]

I've created Category:Icons for railway descriptions/parallel railways/uw/double in order to separate "common" ÜWs that just happen to begin/end at entry points for parallel tracks, from double-line 45° curves, mainly because these groups are incompatible between themselves. This was done at the expense of Tuválkin's single line category (I don't mind employing this additional breaking-up criterion, but I don't see any benefit in it either), so possibly another category may be added. YLSS (talk) 19:11, 13 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Good idea, those doubles. I created the "single line" subcats because there were many icons accumulated at generic "parallel" categories and it is simple to diffuse and retrieve them based on whether an icon is like   (vSTR) or like   (vSTR-), or also things like   (vBHF) and   (vBHF-STR) vs.   (vBHF-). -- Tuválkin ✉ 12:51, 14 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
"one side", in contrast, is IMO a good idea. YLSS (talk) 15:48, 14 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
moved related discussion to Talk:BSicon/Renaming/SPL#.../parallel railways/uw/double

Category:BSicon/road/tunnel

[edit]

Tuválkin, and you kept this top secret! YLSS (talk) 19:08, 24 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I have been meaning to initiate that discussion, and this category was made for example. I think that we should:
  • Abbandon the top level Category:Icons for railway descriptions (and kin) and move the whole tree onto under Category:BSicon. For me it is obvious why, but if anyone has doubts, lets discuss it.
  • Keep the current category naming system, with slashes that give a “breadcrumb trail” (and also keeping the recently/finaly adopted multi-tree approach!), but avoid some of the longer names (such as "stations and stops") and replace them with shorter ones. Ditto.
This changeover can be done seamlessly and swiftly with Cat-a-lot and a few volunteers in a couple days; redirects will keep the whole working during the changeover. -- Tuválkin ✉ 00:24, 25 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Q1. "BSicon/road" => "BSicon/water", "BSicon/set u"; but what about present "Icons for railway descriptions"? "BSicon/set bahn", "BSicon/bahn", "BSicon/standard" or something else? YLSS (talk) 08:39, 25 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
My stand: having arrived at an impasse, either we move everything under "BSicon", or move everything under "Icons for railway/canal/motorway descriptions". Having a mix of both is incoherent and confuses new icon designers during icon categorisation. Also leaves chances for users to inadvertently create erroneous and duplicative categories under both "BSicon" and "Icons for *** descriptions". NoNews! 06:09, 13 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Agree with Tuválkin to eliminate the top level Category:Icons for railway descriptions. Useddenim (talk) 15:14, 13 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Great but Category:Icons for railway descriptions should not be deleted, simply left alone to be used for actual icons for/of railway descriptions. BSicons should be categorized under Category:BSicon — this should be a no-brainer, but it is taking years to implement… :-\ -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 00:49, 14 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Agree. Everything under Category:BSicon leaving Category:Icons for railway descriptions for non-BSicons. — Preceding unsigned comment added by [[User:|]] ([[User talk:|talk]] • contribs)
  • No category including "Icons for railway descriptions" should be deleted for now, while they are not fully moved to new names, as their lack compromises the breadcrumb function in the remaining ones. Indeed they should be kept indifinitely as redirects, or else so many of our past discussion become mostly senseless. -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 17:54, 25 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Difference between basic set and set u categories

[edit]

I was filling in some gaps in the parallel line tunnel portal icons and I noticed some inconsistencies in the category names between the basic set and set u icons. For example, basic set tunnel portals are in Category:Icons for railway descriptions/parallel railways/tunnel/portal, while for set u the equivalent icons have been in Category:Icons for railway descriptions/set u/parallel lines/tunnel to ground. To me the first style makes more sense (but ideally with 'parallel lines' instead of 'parallel railways').

Old New
Category:Icons for railway descriptions/set u/parallel lines/tunnel to ground Category:Icons for railway descriptions/set u/parallel lines/tunnel/portal
Category:Icons for railway descriptions/set u/parallel lines/tunnel to elevated Category:Icons for railway descriptions/set u/parallel lines/tunnel/portal/to elevated
Category:Icons for railway descriptions/set u/tunnel to ground Category:Icons for railway descriptions/set u/tunnel/portal
Category:Icons for railway descriptions/set u/tunnel to elevated Category:Icons for railway descriptions/set u/tunnel/portal/to elevated

Thoughts? -- Imperator3733 (talk) 03:52, 2 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Those are known discrepancies (I thought there were even more), but I never tried to homogenize them because either version is incorrect — I suspect other people thought the same. The thing is that all of these categories need to be renamed. First of all, we are using Category:Icons for railway descriptions to host exclusively “BS icons” (i.e. diagram elements to be used with a specific set of templates), which should done at the top of Category:BSicon instead (cf. the test name of Category:BSicon/road/tunnel); second, there’s a lot of detail terms which should be discussed: That means a very wide discussion subject, on which little consensus is set — it will be an epic discussion, not unlike what happened with the standartization of colors 2 years ago. (I don’t think there will be epic disagreements, though, just that there’s a lot of ground to cover.) In view of that, the above are minor annoyances which will be dully ironed out once that general cat renaming is done. (That said, there’s no harm in going ahead with the detail renames outlined above, it will only help.) -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 09:22, 2 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I actually prefer the "tunnel to x" variants over the "portal" versions, because is is a clear description of what two sets the icons are connecting, namely the "tunnel" set and the elevated, ground (standard), etc. The icons may contain a portal, but that's not the set name and how does one have a line come out of a tunnel without a portal anyway? Lost on  Belmont 3200N1000W  (talk) 12:53, 2 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Agree. Useddenim (talk) 19:48, 2 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
You make a good point about the benefits of "tunnel to x". That format definitely allows for finer-grained categories (such a "cutting to ground" or "embankment to elevated"). -- Imperator3733 (talk) 01:54, 4 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
That is a big project. I think I'm going to start coming up with a proposal for how to clean things up. I'll post it here when I have a good handle on things. -- Imperator3733 (talk) 01:54, 4 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Useddenim and Tuvalkin: User talk:CommonsDelinker/commands/Category moves should help with moving the roughly 900 categories left to Category:BSicon/. I've omitted /straight tracks and /terminus from the category tree, and changed "half width" to "half-width", but otherwise the naming should be largely the same. Jc86035 (talk) Use {{re|Jc86035}}
to reply to me 08:54, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I suggest you apply for (or make use of) file moving rights. Along with Cat-a-lot, it will make the cat renaming effort much faster and simpler. Concerning the names, I want to insist that this general renaming, long sought and too much delayed as it is, should not be a wasted opportunity for impovements in the naming of each node of the tree: Keeping the quirks of the old cats is not a desirable feature. -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 12:44, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Tuvalkin: I have file moving rights, but the limit of 3 per minute causes me to be throttled very often and it takes absolutely ages. Jc86035 (talk) Use {{re|Jc86035}}
to reply to me 14:37, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I just moved Category:Icons for railway descriptions/set ruby into Category:BSicon/railway/set ruby in one go, no issues. What are we doing differently? -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 16:07, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Tuvalkin: It usually happens if I make moves more than once every 20 seconds. Since there are 950 categories to deal with it'd probably be more efficient to just get the bot to do it (and a consensus could be formulated here before sending the move commands all in one go). Jc86035 (talk) Use {{re|Jc86035}}
to reply to me 16:21, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Useddenim, Tuvalkin, and Lost on Belmont: Are the /straight and /direction categories necessary? I suspect having /direction would be more useful than /straight, but I'm not entirely sure. Jc86035 (talk) Use {{re|Jc86035}}
to reply to me 10:25, 17 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

We can have both. Note that an icon may be straight and have or not a direction mark (arrow), but or also have a direction mark and be not straight. -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 15:36, 18 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Tuvalkin: The reason /straight might not be necessary is that the station categories seem to assume that default is straight and not /curve. Consistency with those would help with simplifying the tree somewhat as well. Jc86035 (talk) Use {{re|Jc86035}}
to reply to me 05:01, 19 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Plain tracks

[edit]

@Useddenim and Tuvalkin: I'm currently creating a bunch of new categories under BSicon/railway/, since I'm uploading a very large number of icons and don't really fancy making anyone have to recategorize all of them later. Building the category trees, I've noticed that Category:Icons for railway descriptions/set u/plain tracks doesn't really seem to do much. Should it be omitted in the new category trees (i.e. /railway → /railway/k, /railway/uw, railway/straight, etc.)? Jc86035 (talk) Use {{re|Jc86035}}
to reply to me 17:08, 1 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

three-quarter shifts

[edit]

Could someone help me categorize the new 3⁄4 shift icons I uploaded? I've created some of the categories but I'm not sure where some of them (e.g.   (exhvSHI3l+l-)) might go. Jc86035 (talk) Use {{re|Jc86035}}
to reply to me 10:21, 6 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Shifts

[edit]

@Useddenim and Tuvalkin: Is the /split group of categories necessary? Basically all shift junctions are categorized into those, with the exception of these twelve (it seems a bit arbitrary and some of those might not be supposed to be in the /junctions category) and the three-quarter shifts I just uploaded, so it might be better to sort them into /shift/junction instead of /split/junction and delete the /split/junction categories. Jc86035 (talk) Use {{re|Jc86035}}
to reply to me 14:27, 11 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • I agree. A split is always a shift, either symmetrical (  (SPLa)) or assymmetrical (  (SHI2gl) or   (vSHI2gl-)). With halfwith icons the matter can get murky (since half the curve could be imagined to go on slanted, as in   (STR+1)), but there’s no reason to treat the blue ones differently. -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 21:39, 23 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Categorization template

[edit]

@Useddenim, Tuvalkin, Newfraferz87, and C21H22N2O2: I have created a new category template, {{BS-category}}, which utilizes Module:BSicon. This template has no parameters, unlike {{BS-color/category}}, and automatically generates description text and categories based on page title. Currently it should work on all BSicon categories except those named "Icons for…", and those containing two-, three- or four-quarter splits, 3-curves, or CPIC icons (and a few other edge cases – please report if it's broken on a correctly-named category). It should ignore the "plain tracks" categories; this is deliberate. Jc86035 (talk) 10:01, 23 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Divergent junctions

[edit]

@Useddenim, Tuvalkin, and Newfraferz87: Is junction/divergent (rather than just junction) a necessary category? The tunnel and elevated icons have never used this node. Jc86035 (talk) 13:22, 25 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • Okay, good. So it seems that what we should decide on is whether this is indeed a special case of junction that’s useful to be set set aside in subcats or not. I think it is, but I don’t think this is really important. -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 01:12, 28 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

S-Bahn

[edit]

@Useddenim and Tuvalkin: How should Icons for railway descriptions/suburban commuter service be renamed? I think "suburban commuter service" is a bit long so maybe it could be changed to "commuter rail" or "S-Bahn". Jc86035 (talk) 17:14, 5 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Not "S-Bahn", because that is specific to German-speaking places. Perhaps "suburban services"? Useddenim (talk) 13:17, 6 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I think that should be fine. Jc86035 (talk) 14:00, 6 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

"tunnel to elevated" and "tunnel to ground"

[edit]

Should the tunnel portal categories be renamed /tunnel/portal and /elevated/tunnel/portal? /elevated/tunnel is slightly awkward but we would have to make those categories anyway to sort crossings like   (mhKRZt) (for which Module:BSicon currently generates Category:BSicon/railway/set mixed/elevated/tunnel/crossing). Jc86035 (talk) 05:47, 13 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

under

[edit]

@Useddenim and Tuvalkin: Should Category:Icons for railway descriptions/uw/under become BSicon/railway/uw/under? I'd like to include straight+corner and curve+corner into the new category names, but I'm not sure if it should just be BSicon/railway/uw/straight+corner/under, and not sure if   (xSTR+1) etc. would then belong in curve+corner. Jc86035 (talk) 14:45, 27 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • In my option, not a problem. Things like   (xSTR+1) are curve+corner, understood as on a flat cross (or unspecified, for undetailed diagrams); curve+corner icons can be under/over but not always, and vice versa. I can have all these:
    1. BSicon/railway/*/straight+corner
    2. BSicon/railway/*/under
    3. BSicon/railway/*/straight+corner/under
with 3 having both 1 and 2 as its parents. Is this what you meant? -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 22:44, 16 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Tuvalkin: I think so, yes. Jc86035 (talk) 09:32, 17 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

krw

[edit]

@Useddenim, Tuvalkin, and Epicgenius: Should the krw categories be retained in the new tree, or should they be merged into the four-quarter shifts categories? There's not much separating them other than their naming, and even then, the standard KRW icons should probably be renamed en masse with pywikibot (perhaps KRW – the root and the category – could be kept for the "flyover" icons like   (KRWgl+lo) per   (vÜWBl)). Jc86035 (talk) 16:05, 16 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • @Jc86035: I agree with possibly renaming KRW en masse. Should we rename BS2-icons to SHI2-icons as well? There should be a uniform naming system. For example, we have   (SHI1l) (one quarter) and   (SHI3l) (three quarters) but   (BS2l) (two quarters) and   (KRWl) (four quarters). epicgenius (talk) 21:34, 16 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I'm all for renaming the BS2 and non-flyover KRW icons (although I'm sure there will be howls of objection from DE:WP). And while we're at it, we should probably fix the mistake I introduced when I proposed the SHI root, and drop the “I” to shorten SHI1/SHI2/SHI3/SHI4 to SH1/SH2/SH3/SH4. Useddenim (talk) 01:41, 19 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Cross-platform interchange icons

[edit]

@Useddenim and Tuvalkin: Module:BSicon currently categorizes XBHF icons into .../BHF/interchange (alongside regular interchange icons). Is this fine, or is an extra /cross-platform needed? I originally intended to configure the module to set /interchange/cross-platform, but it didn't work properly. I know how to fix it, but maybe keeping it as it is would be better. Jc86035 (talk) 14:46, 14 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • I’d prefer separate cats for the cross-platform icons, although I would not insist on it. On the other hand, I’d insist on short, simple words to make up the breadcrumb and "cross-platform" seems too long (no better idea atm, sorry). -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 15:28, 14 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

 Agree, and why not keep the legacy name for the category: …/interchange/CPIC? Useddenim (talk) 17:36, 14 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Corners

[edit]

@Useddenim and Tuvalkin:

  • Should   (hSTR3+4~GG) (connecting icon for   (hSTR3+4)) be categorized as a corner icon or a curve icon?
  • Should   (hv-STR2~RR) (connecting icon for   (hv-STR2)) be categorized as a corner icon or a curve icon?
  • Should   (tSTRc4~L) (renamed from tSTR3+1~R; connects to   (tSTRc2~R)) be categorized as a corner icon or a straight icon?

I'm not sure about these. The precedent is (probably) to categorize based on the geometry (e.g. for formation icons without the l prefix). Jc86035 (talk) 11:01, 15 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Icon Category
  (hSTR3+4~GG) corner
  (hv-STR2~RR) curve
  (tSTRc4~L) not sure
maybe both?
Useddenim (talk) 13:21, 15 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Useddenim:   (tSTRc4~L) can't be categorised as both "corner" and "straight" because the Category:BSicon tree has "straight+corner" and "corner" categories, but not "straight" categories. ("straight+corner" wouldn't make sense because it would be for icons with both a straight track and a corner track.) I think "corner" might make more sense, since STR+c4~L or vSTR+c4~L would presumably be categorised as uw/straight+corner. Jc86035 (talk) 16:03, 15 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

uw/double and split categories

[edit]

@Useddenim and Tuvalkin: I've been trying to rationalize the Category:BSicon/railway/parallel lines/split and Category:BSicon/railway/parallel lines/uw/double groups at the same time, and I've run into two related issues.

  • Should the "double" categorization be applied to both curved and straight tracks, or just curves? Does it specifically mean that at least one of the lines connects to a parallel lines corner, or just to the specific   (vSTR2)-type geometry?
  • Should splits be explicitly categorized as parallel lines? This is inconsistent with the one- and three-quarter shifts, which necessarily always connect to a parallel line, but allows them to be easily categorized as uw/double (otherwise category logic problems ensue). This is was how it was done until earlier today.

Jc86035 (talk) 16:54, 8 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your questions are confusing to me. Some visual examples, please. Also, what happened earlier today? Useddenim (talk) 20:12, 8 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Useddenim: What happened was that I recategorized all of the BSicons in the uw/double and split groups, the latter so that they would be moved from the "Icons for..." categories to the "BSicon/..." categories.
For the former (assuming that the "double" categorization continues to exist):
  • Definitely in uw/double:   (vSTR+1),   (vSTR3+l) (parallel curves)
  • Possibly in uw/double:   (vSTR3+1),   (vCONT3+1) (parallel straights)
  • Possibly in uw/double:   (SPL2) (splits which connect to parallel corners)
  • Possibly in uw/double:   (vSPL4+f~r),   (vSTRc3) (corners and splits which connect to parallel lines)
  • Not in uw/double:   (vSTR2-),   (SPLg+2)
For the latter:
  • Definitely in parallel lines:   (vSPL4+f~r),   (vSPL4+f~l) (splits with v prefix)
  • Possibly in parallel lines:   (SPL3),   (SPL+4),   (SPLa) (splits without v prefix which connect to parallel lines or corners)
I hope this helps clarify what I was asking. Jc86035 (talk) 12:05, 9 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
It sounds right. The only comments I have are that I believe SPL icons are in parallel lines because they do connect to vSTR etc. I'm not sure about   (vSPL4+f~r) which does not connect to any regular (double) vSTR, nor   (vSTRc3) et al. which only has a single line. Useddenim (talk) 14:54, 9 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Useddenim: I was assuming that "double" referred to the icon geometry, not to the number of lines visible in the image (otherwise we would categorize   (vSTR+1~l) identically to   (v-STR+1)); YLSS's comment at 19:11, 13 June 2013 (UTC) in #.../parallel railways/uw/double seems to indicate that this is the case.
  (vSPL4+f~r) connects to   (STRc1) and   (vSTR2+4~l) (the three diagonal lines are evenly spaced).
All SHI1 and SHI3 icons connect to one "parallel" line (-125/125/375/625) and one non-"parallel" line (-250/0/250/500), but only those that have the v prefix use the parallel lines categorization. The same could logically be done for the SPL icons, which are very closely related to the SHI1 series. Jc86035 (talk) 15:05, 9 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Okay. Useddenim (talk) 15:16, 9 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Mass reorganization

[edit]

I just did a lot of work on categorization for this project, mainly using {{BS-category}} where it had not been there before, moving categories from "Icons for railway descriptions" to "BSicon/railway", and creating parent categories which did not already exist. I think there are a few things which may require discussion; if this involves undoing or deleting some of my actions, I will not object.

  • Handling subcategories involving two different colors coming together.
  • Several categories exist despite not being implemented into Module:BSicon, such as "level crossing", "straight" and "traverser".
  • Many categories still need to be updated from "Icons for X descriptions".

-BRAINULATOR9 (TALK) 01:48, 4 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Populated places

[edit]

This doesn’t look right:

-- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 08:38, 16 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yet another of Cmuelle8 (contribs) crazy creations. Useddenim (talk) 00:41, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Category:BSicon/railway/shift/one quarter/split vs Category:BSicon/railway/split

[edit]

Why is there both Category:BSicon/railway/shift/one quarter/split and Category:BSicon/railway/split, and why apparently the same kind of icons, such as   (SPLa+r) and   (SPLa), are categorized in one and not in the other? -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 21:49, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

With the exception of   (ISLAND), all of the icons in Category:BSicon/railway/split are turns rather than a shift along the axis of travel. Useddenim (talk) 02:42, 27 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Limited

[edit]
Moved from Talk:BSicon/Renaming#Category:BSicon/railway/stations and stops/express

Since   (pBHF) et al. are used to indicate any sort of limited or partial service, the category should probably be renamed to Category:BSicon/railway/stations and stops/limited. Useddenim (talk) 12:30, 14 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I agree — but is it easy to do that, including the need to change Module:BSicon? (And, if so, can we replace all instances of stations and stops with the simpler stations, please?) -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 02:51, 18 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Changing "express" to "limited" in Module:BSicon would be relatively straightforward, since it would only require replacing each instance of the word that's present in the module.
There would be about 350 categories that would need to be renamed when changing "express" to "limited", and there would be about 3,000 categories to be renamed if "stations and stops" were changed to "stations". I think Pywikibot could handle it. Jc86035 (talk) 08:54, 22 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It’s a lot of renamings, but I think it would be worth the effort. Can you put it in motion? -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 13:16, 22 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'll start with renaming the "express" categories to "limited" and see how it goes. Jc86035 (talk) 14:26, 22 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Tuvalkin: It took slightly over an hour, but it seems to have worked effortlessly. (Pywikibot's category.py changes the category name on the contents of the category as well as the category itself.)
If we are agreed on it then I can rename the "stations and stops" categories, although I will wait a little bit in case anyone objects to it. Jc86035 (talk) 15:47, 22 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Simplification (stations and stops → stations) is an excellent idea. Useddenim (talk) 17:58, 22 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
+1 --93.201.162.11 23:47, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This is great! A clean job, no hangups, no hassle, now simpler and easier to you. Many thanks! -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 15:16, 4 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Are shifts curves?

[edit]

@Useddenim, Tuvalkin: I've noticed that in 2022 someone on an IP address decided to recategorize some (but not all) shift icons using a different definition of what "shift" means. Their system seems to have worked as follows:

  1. A curve has to have different orientations at its start and end, meaning that a basic shift by itself is not a curve, so   (SHI1l) was recategorized from shift/one quarter/curve to shift/one quarter.
  2. A 90° curve can be considered a shift if it doesn't form a circular arc from one edge to the other, so   (vSTR+lf-) was recategorized from parallel lines/curve to parallel lines/shift/two quarters/curve.

Does any of this make sense? I thought some of these changes were mistakes so I reversed some of them, but then I realised how widely this had been applied (even if not consistently). Some newer icons like   (eSHI1+lKRZ2+4t) have already been categorized in this way by their uploaders.

I don't particularly mind if the changes are kept, but they didn't apply them uniformly (in particular, they seemingly didn't recategorize anything in set u), so I want to figure out what should be done to reduce the amount of inconsistency in categorization.

Based on how I wrote the auto-categorization function of Module:BSicon, I explicitly thought that "curve" was meant to be a distinct category from "corner" and "junction" for shifts, just like with k-curves and uw-curves. Nevertheless, I personally think change 1 makes some amount of sense, since it would reduce the amount of categories that only contain other categories, though it would also affect icons like   (dSTR3+1) if it were truly applied consistently. However, I don't think change 2 makes as much sense, since reserving the "shift" categorization for SHI and SPL icons probably is easier to manage and comprehend. Jc86035 (talk) 06:15, 22 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think that a shift is the same orientation but a different alignment, whereas as curve has two different orientations. (So   (vSTR+lf-) would be classified as a curve, and   (dSTR3+1) is a shift.) Useddenim (talk) 14:27, 22 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
So you would place   (SHI1l) in Category:BSicon/railway/shift/one quarter and not in Category:BSicon/railway/shift/one quarter/curve? Jc86035 (talk) 14:32, 22 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Jc86035: Yes, that is correct. As are the BS2 icons. Useddenim (talk) 14:41, 22 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
straightcurved
parallelright  (vSTR-)  (vSTR+lg-)
left  (v-STR)  (v-STR+lf)
both  (vSTR)  (vSTR+l)
shiftedright  (vSHI2l-)  (v-STR+lg)
left  (v-SHI2r)  (vSTR+lf-)
both  (vÜWB) (vSTR+lf-※ v-STR+lg) 
I have a huge amount of distrust about IP edits that are not the work of random one-time contributers. Who did that should just log in so dialog can be possible; anything else is hugely suspicious.
That said, I cannot disagree with the two points you make. While .1 is kinda trivial, .2 may need an illustrative example:
-- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 23:05, 22 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
tl;dr: In my opinion, things like   (vSTR+lf-) are both shifts and curves. -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 14:48, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
IconCurrent categorizationIf change 2 were applied uniformly
  (SPLar)BSicon/railway/splitBSicon/railway/shift/one quarter/split/curve
  (dSTRl-)BSicon/railway/half-width/parallel lines/curveBSicon/railway/half-width/shift/one quarter/curve?
  (STRl~R)BSicon/railway/curveBSicon/railway/shift/two quarters/curve?
  (STR+l.L)BSicon/railway/curve?
  (STR+4~L)BSicon/railway/uw/curve?
@Useddenim, @Tuvalkin: Are we sure applying change 2 more broadly would make sense? I think doing it for 90° turns where the curve is entirely within the bounds of the icon frame could make sense, but it potentially falls apart for other icons and maybe doesn't make sense for half-width icons, so I have doubts about whether it could be implemented in a coherent way.
Note that although   (STR+l~L) connects to   (STR+l~R),   (STR+l.L) connects to   (STR+r.L). I think it might make sense to rename   (STR+r.L) to vvWSLa.R and create a new icon where the straight line continues to the left edge. Jc86035 (talk) 03:31, 23 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Jc86035 and Tuvalkin: would it not make more sense to use my simpler definitions? Then the above examples would all be curves. Useddenim (talk) 06:02, 23 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I do think this would make more sense.
Since we have agreed that shifts shouldn't be categorized as curves, for now I will update Module:BSicon and the appropriate categories so that that can be implemented properly. Jc86035 (talk) 06:47, 23 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I don’t think we are actively disagreeing. -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 13:19, 23 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Fork

[edit]

The same anonymous user mentioned above also created BSicon/railway/fork and didn't finish the job (despite managing to code support for it into Module:BSicon), so most of the applicable tunnel and elevated icons are not in it, and they didn't define whether   (ABZg23) or   (kABZg23) would be considered forks.

  • Do we keep these categories?
  • How is this defined? Does any junction that splits into three or more lines count as a fork?

Jc86035 (talk) 18:00, 23 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Another question: How is it that an IP can edit the module namespace? Isn’t that a security issue? -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 14:51, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think it would be a security issue; if it were then most registered users wouldn't be allowed to edit them either. The module code is only executed on the server while the page is rendered, so any possible hijacking functionality would be equivalent to that of editing regular templates. Jc86035 (talk) 15:04, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think that it's necessary to create a separate "fork" category, especially since its definition is somewhat nebulous and it really is at best a variation of "junction". (On the other hand, I think a strong case can be made for keeping BSicon/railway/wye.) Useddenim (talk) 16:59, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed on both accounts. -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 01:48, 25 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
(For some reason, this one page is failing to load the Monobook skin for me, even though I’m obviously logged in; other Commons pages are displaying normally. This has been on for >24 h. This design, Vector Whatsitsname, is truely pukeworthy for me, I cannot stand to look at it. I’ll comment further on these threds once this is fixed.) -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 16:17, 25 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

CFDs

[edit]

Please note

 — billinghurst sDrewth 01:27, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:BSicon/Categorization&oldid=874352569"