Commons talk:Library of Congress
- Find a good category to put this page in.
- Providing external links to the various collections in the library of congress next to the respective templates.
- Providing category links for the collections.
- Making a main section about the collections where each allowed collection is described and its various links and categories are put.
Hi folks, I work with picture of the Library of Congress quite often and have reasonable concern about technical specs used on Commons and other projects. This is my attempt on unification:
There is more to follow... Feel free to comment and add your own opinion here. Would be great if we could achieve unification for all uploads one day. Regards.--Peter Weis (talk) 20:12, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
- Why converting the TIFF to JPG ? Commons now (nearly) support TIFF (see the prototype). Jean-Fred (talk) 00:05, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
I am aware of this new feature. Though it is a breakthrough in displaying and usability its technical aspects are disputable. First of all the 100mb upload limit remains - so not all imagery of interest could be uploaded. Secondly don't think of Commons as a mere displaying area. Users also tend to download and work with the items we provide. Starting from a simple wallpaper up to a presentation. Not all applications use .tiff, so .jpg is considered to be more widespread and therefore useful. Since there is no limitation besides the 100mb barrier, uploading several file formats seems reasonable here. Thirdly the .tiff support has neither been reviewed nor tested under proper conditions. My fourth and last point is about usability again - users who do not have access to photo software or enough hdd space would not benefit of a single format. So my conclusion is:
Uploading both formats will help all users, irrespective of their individual needs. Commons does not limit its servers in question of space, so providing both versions will do no harm to anyone.
- I probably have misunderstood your text above, but you told nothing about uploading the TIFF versions at all, which I found problematic. Of course, uploading alternative JPG versions cannot really hurt. I fully agree with your conclusion (which I took the liberty to highlight).
- You do make good points. Overall, I believe it would be better if MediaWiki/Toolserver would convert TIFF images on the fly. Either for the user to download, or for the editor to easily upload an alternative version. I do not think it would be very difficult.
- 3rd point : I think we can trust devs to review and test the feature ;-) (there must be a good reason why it is not deployed yet).
- 4th point, as for size : users can already download JPEG files at the resolution they want, it will surely be possible as well with TIFF (the format problem remains though)
- Jean-Fred (talk) 19:45, 20 August 2010 (UTC)
quickly jotting these ideas down.
- "i found an error" -> contact page of LoC (good experiences, remember durova) Done
- "how do i find the digital id" link it from "missing" in LOC-meta...
- I informed LOC via "Contacting" that http://www.loc.gov/pictures/item/2004672088/ / https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Adolf_Hitler_in_Nuremberg_1923_cph.3a15028.jpg is from 1935, not 1923:
- "the image is from november 1935, parade of SA troops past Hitler in Nuremberg
- Compare with this picture from National Archives (same standard bearer)
- http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Reichsparteitag._Der_Vorbeimarsch_der_SA_am_Fhrer._Parade_of_SA_troops_past_Hitler._Nuremberg,_november_1935._-_NARA_-_558779.tif " -- Cherubino (talk) 08:26, 1 November 2013 (UTC)