Commons:Graphics village pump/June 2013

Inkscape is good, but ...

the wiki renderer shows a black rectangle on the right side of File:Male anatomy de.SVG. How can I get rid of?. --Createaccount 14:10, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

Mysterious black rectangles in renderings of SVG files are almost always due to Inkscape "flowtext" nonsense, as can be diagnosed at Commons:SVG Check... -- AnonMoos (talk) 20:30, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

Regarding recent activity at the Wikipedia:Photography workshop

[The "Welcome" section up top of this (Commons:Graphics_village_pump) page indicated that it's an appropriate place to discuss protocol. As some protocol discussions which have been taking place at the Wikipedia:Photography workshop also encompass Commons files and guidelines I thought it might be good to post here as well.]

I'd like to invite the greater Graphics lab community to look in on the (en) Wikipedia Photography workshop for awhile. There's been a fair bit of contention/lively debate lately and I fear that trust and rapport amongst editors is slipping and may come to affect our ability to well serve the community. Perusing/skimming the Photography workshop talk page and the requests section and it's recent archives should give one an idea of how things have been going. Or one could simply add the workshop page to one's 'watchlist' and keep an eye open for a bit. I feel that we may benefit from a larger pool of opinion at this point. Thanks for your time and consideration, --Kevjonesin (talk) 11:19, 10 June 2013 (UTC)

Update

Things seem to have 'come to a head'. Tensions are starting to ease and constructive dialog has begun.--Kevjonesin (talk) 15:46, 15 June 2013 (UTC)

These threads may have direct relevance to Commons

What/where procedures.

Some ideas at this point.

--Kevjonesin (talk) 16:02, 15 June 2013 (UTC)

Something is wrong in my jpgs

I uploaded File:File 20051012101753.jpg and there says No higher resolution available. under the thumbnail. But if you clikl on the image you do get a bigger image. (I had some trouble after I cropped the black margins of the first image, but now seems to be allright). Do you know why commons says "No higher resolution available"?. --Createaccount 11:33, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

It says "No higher resolution available" for all raster images which are neither wider than 800 pixels nor taller than 600 pixels. I don't know why you would see something bigger by clicking on the main display of the image, unless the version with black bars along the sides was inconsistently cached. I don't see any problem... AnonMoos (talk) 16:08, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

Take a look to File:Somethingistwrong.png. The first update has two black sides. the cropped update seems correct in the history but is wrong in the thumbnail. --Createaccount 19:30, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

It's just a caching inconsistency; click on the "purge" tab then reload, and it should probably be fixed; if not, then try again in a day or two... AnonMoos (talk) 21:00, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

OK, thanks. --Createaccount 09:06, 20 June 2013 (UTC)

LibreOffice and valid SVGs

I have drawn a vector graphic in LibreOffice and exported it to SVG. The svg element has, among others, the attribute: xmlns:ooo="http://xml.openoffice.org/svg/export". When I run it through validator.w3.org, it complains, beside some valid points (which if they haven't already been, I'm going to report as bugs to the LO team), that there are no attributes ooo:slide and ooo:id-list. I do not understand this - shouldn't it ignore the ooo namespace attributes if the ooo namespace is declared in the root element? Any XML experts around who understand this? Is this because the link in the namespace declaration returns a 404 error? Or is it a bug in LibreOffice or the W3C validator? darkweasel94 16:20, 20 June 2013 (UTC)

Don't think I've ever seen an OOO-generated SVG file before, but I doubt whether what you mentioned would prevent an SVG file from displaying on Wikimedia Commons, since Adobe Illustrator files loaded with junk from non-standard namespaces are a dime a dozen here. What works on Commons is not always the same as theoretically correct SVG/XML... AnonMoos (talk) 21:53, 20 June 2013 (UTC)

Yes, probably that wouldn't prevent it from displaying on Wikimedia Commons. I can of course also remove those attributes by hand, which is what I'm going to do. But I was simply wondering if LO really uses XML namespaces incorrectly? After all, Inkscape extensions AFAIK don't throw validation errors. darkweasel94 22:10, 20 June 2013 (UTC)