Commons talk:File types

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to Commons:File types.
This talk page is automatically archived by ArchiveBot. Any sections older than 180 days are automatically archived. Sections without timestamps are not archived.

WAV and FLAC players[edit]

I noticed moving a WAV and FLAC file to a new name causes the player not to work on them unless the file is reuploaded. Anyone have this problem? – Illegitimate Barrister (talkcontribs), 02:40, 5 April 2018 (UTC)

Update audio codec recommendations[edit]

According to en:Opus (audio format), the Opus codec is an effective replacement for both Speex (obsoleted by Xiph.Org) and Vorbis. Since MediaWiki supports .opus files, should this be our recommended format for general audio files over Vorbis? Opus is arguably better in every respect, but Vorbis has been around longer and has more support from operating systems and browsers (though the same can be said for mp3 vs ogg). clpo13(talk) 20:29, 2 January 2019 (UTC)

@Multichill: and others:
What's the status of rules and preferences on Wikimedia Commons regarding files in the MP3 format?
In particular is the advice on this page still current, that "As of December 2017, Commons only accepts MP3 uploads by admins, image reviewers, and extended uploaders due to concerns about the capacity of the community to monitor for copyright violations"?
I ask in part because the Commons article on Commons:Extended uploaders begins with, "This page is presently inactive and retained primarily for historical interest. Extended uploader has been discontinued per community consensus and all user rights have been granted to both the autopatroller and the patroller groups."
This may be a distinction without a difference, because this is the first I've heard of "Extended uploaders", "autopatroller" and "patroller" groups, in spite of having a "Global edit count" exceeding 8,000 since 2010-03-26 including 267 on Commons.
More specifically,
  • I hope to attract people affiliated with the Grassroots Radio Coalition to use Wikiversity to collaborate on producing training materials shared between listener-sponsored radio station members of the Grassroots Radio Coalition,
  • MP3 is the only audio format that I've used at KKFI, a listener-sponsored radio station in Kansas City,
  • I'd like to be able to encourage people to upload material in MP3 format to Wikimedia Commons if that's feasible, and
  • the Wikiversity article on v:Audacity says, "Wikiversity only uploads OGG files. Attempts to upload other file formats gets a very vague error message so you must use a program like Audacity to do the conversion."
Comments? Thanks, DavidMCEddy (talk) 12:29, 3 September 2019 (UTC)
For all supported forms of lossy audio, the original format is the best one to upload, never convert if at all possible. This goes equally for MP3 as Vorbis. As Opus is the clear technical winner of not just the free format war, but all lossy formats at this point, I would say that's easily the first choice for original compression unless there's a specific constraint; it's been in all current browsers for years. (Heck, Edge supported Opus before it supported Vorbis.) When the original isn't in a supported format, it's a judgement call whether to convert to FLAC or to a supported lossy format. Same if you can't upload the original MP3 because it's too much hassle to get the rights, though at least then you can ask someone else to do so. As for Wikiversity, it intentionally allows a very constrained subset of formats that the rest of Wikimedia supports. SilverbackNettalk 17:58, 17 October 2019 (UTC)

Image use instructions[edit]

The section "Animated GIF" now says that "inline animations should be used sparingly". This seems odd. The rest of the page is about uploading, not use. Is this about use in galleries, policy pages or what? I suppose it is a guideline of some Wikipedia, which for some reason has been repeated (or written) here. In that case I suppose the paragraph should be removed. If the reason is some other, one should explain what use this is about. --LPfi (talk) 15:38, 6 June 2019 (UTC)

@LPfi: I use 3 animated gif files on my user page: File:Qxz-ad2.gif; File:Movicons2-hello.gif; and File:Welcomebanner.gif. The latter 2 have been there for 9 years. Is that wrong?   — Jeff G. please ping or talk to me 16:01, 6 June 2019 (UTC)
I think they (at least the one I spotted) make reading the adjacent text significantly harder, so I think the "niceness" value should be given less weight than the accessibility issue. I would however give significant leeway for designing user pages. If this is a significant problem, the guideline about user pages should note it. The issues are different on different pages, and users adding content to pages are probably not coming here for advice, so if we want to keep the paragraph, there should be links to here and the paragraph should include a discussion presenting the issues. --LPfi (talk) 09:09, 7 June 2019 (UTC)
@LPfi: I added alt text to my uses in these edits.   — Jeff G. please ping or talk to me 17:18, 7 June 2019 (UTC)
The issue is that something that moves or changes shape distracts from the reading. I have to make an effort to concentrate on the text, which I wouldn't need otherwise. With my former web browser it was easy to turn off such animations (still two or three clicks before reading instead of just reading), but on this I do not know an easy way to do it. With fvwm it is easy to move some other element (the clock, an xterm, ...) over the disturbing image, but e.g. windows insists the active window being on top. I suppose some users will have real difficulties reading the text, but as this is not Wikipedia, they can just skip reading with not much harm done. --LPfi (talk) 15:38, 9 June 2019 (UTC)

Guidance on pdf vs svg[edit]

Inkscape has become significantly better at converting PDFs, and rsvg significantly better at rendering them. But this page, which should provide guidance, just notes that yes, SVG is good and PDF is also good for vector files. Is there any kind of consensus on how strongly to prefer SVG over the original file? Or always upload original PDF even if it's less accessible? SilverbackNettalk 18:25, 17 October 2019 (UTC)