AlisonW

Rail icons

Regardless your work on Commons (e.g. undiscussed icons in the normal category), your corrections here violate the german project's policies. You can read here that e is placed before t. Please don't “correct” that in the future. --MdE ^✉ 00:16, 6. Jan. 2008 (CET)

Entshuldigen. Sowohl 'te' als auch 'et' sind in Gebrauch, aber nur 'te' ist folgerichtig mit andere Piktogramm ID. Bitte auch sehen/besuchen w:User:AlisonW/Rail_Icons, Danke.(should read as "Apologies. Both 'te' and 'et' were in use, but only 'te' is consistent with other icon codes.) --AlisonW 00:17, 7. Jan. 2008 (CET)

(You can answer here, I have this page on my whatchlist some days. Ans sorry if there are some mistakes in my English.) No, that's not right. The et icons were the first ones (there was a template BSe for icons with e (e.g. BSe|tSTR -> etSTR !), and some users who may not to be able to read the policies created the wrong te icons. And because of some te icons their “population” grew more and more. And now, in this case you're right, both are used.

When I look at the experimental-category or at your page, “packt mich das kalte Grausen” I would say in German. It means I'm very shocked of this - I can't find a better word - misuse of BS. BS was created to supersede the old KBS-icons. With KBS, only 5 icons for a complete railway were sufficient!. With BS more and more icons were drawn, and here on de.WP we decided not to create icons for every ocassion. There are two important reasons. 1^st If you create an icon for every combination (e.g. elevated light-rail station with access for disabled over a red-orange motorway with change-over to heavy rail), you will have an unmanageable number of icons. 2^nd For persons who only want to have a short overview of the railway this is a flood of information they can't cope with. Especially for additional things there is a parameter in the BS-template. Or in a short sentence: Most of the icons are waste.

Please write your opinion on the discussion page of the german project to see for yourself that I'm not the only one. --MdE ^✉ 19:05, 7. Jan. 2008 (CET)

I agree with you that because many projects are (a) using the pictograms and (b) that there has not been an effective 'central repository' until now, then the naming has gone astray from the original (DE) intentions. Clearly also one project (DE, EN or other) cannot decide for all or others what is and what is not acceptable but we do all need to remove the duplication of effort. Route maps have become more detailed and more useful as time has passed, which is good, but the mess of names (and FR rename all pictorgams!) is a real problem. I will try to engage in the discussion here and elsewhere. (I will translate this as soon as I can) --AlisonW 21:09, 12. Jan. 2008 (CET)

You don't have to translate it, I can understand it well.

As I wrote above, we (the active users in the BS project on de.wp) don't think the number of icons is good. And for me it seems that not one, but two projects (en and nl) decide for all others, as for example you proove it by replacing icons having a crorrect name with wrong ones. Many projects use the system of BS but create a mess because they don't respect the original intention an the policies. I compare that with the following situation: If you come e.g. from Great Britain to Germany and want to use the Autobahn for moving fast, you can't drive on the left side. But we plan on copying the most important icons to de.wp and re-adjusting the BS template here if the situation on commons gets worse. --MdE ^✉ 01:06, 13. Jan. 2008 (CET)