Jump to content

User:Skeetidot/GeoboxBridge

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

{{Geobox|Building}}

General Comments

[edit]

Here is the bridge geobox template I have so far, using pieces from the standard Geobox 2.0 template, VerruckteDan's geobox template, and fields from the National Bridge Inventory (http://www.nationalbridges.com).

Using Caroig's example from User_talk:VerruckteDan#Bridge_Geobox, I used the basic Geobox|Building template and added _type to add fields specific to bridges. I also listed all the fields I would like to see in a bridge geobox (based on VerruckteDan's geobox template and the National Bridge Inventory). If the field is crossed out, it means I addressed it somehow in the template. If not, we will probably need to modify the geobox code so the field can be added. Also, please see any comments I have after a field. Even though, I may have addressed it, but there is probably a better way to display it, like with the National Bridge Inventory ID number.

I've commented the specific sections below, just a few general ideas. This bridge might be rather a special case as it has actually two parts, most bridges would (probably?) consist of just one part. Anyway, in this special case I'd split the info for both parts into too separate sections as is done with width. The template's idea (and of most advanced infoboxes) is to split the actual data from their presention attributes so I wouldn't use the <br> tag. Also the piece of text explaining which part of the bridge the data relate to should rather go to a corresponding _note, _type or _label field. And finally, only fields which have something in common should be used for a bit different data (so that it would still make some sense even if the _type field is not displayed), so I wouldn't use the range field here, but you probably only used it just for now as there's no suitable field … – Caroig (talk) 19:02, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
I've tried to unify the westbound/estbound parts and changed the NBI number sections, it doesn't have to be this way, these are just my thoughts. – Caroig (talk) 19:43, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

Fields to Add

[edit]

Crossing

[edit]
  • Feature crossed (i.e. river, road, etc.)

Traffic Carried

[edit]

I have a sample here, but VerruckteDan's sample is better.

  • Feature Carried
  • Lane Type (Road, HOV, Bike, Rail, Pedestrian, etc.)
  • Number of Lanes

Comments: these should probably go to the Features section; the existing fields there are more nature oriented so far but adding a few technical ones won't hurt. Given the new, much more efficient, syntax it won't enlarge the template size too much. So let's just decide what these should be. There's also the Access section to take into consideration. – Caroig (talk) 18:50, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

Dimensions

[edit]
  • Number of Spans
  • Main Span Length
  • Other Span Lengths (collapsible)
  • Total Length
  • Width, want to place both eastbound and westbound below the main category, Width
  • Height
  • Vertical Clearance
  • Navigational Clearance
  • Weight Limit

Comments: There is a 'weight' field in the Geobox 2, it can be used for the Weight Limit. But I the unit conversion for weight doesn't support tons or any other X-large weight unit, just kilos and pounds. But this can be added, what should be the metric/imperial pair? Or is just the metric ton used everyplace?

As of the spans it might be more complicated, the collapsible feature is only available for some non-unit fields. There can be up to five length fields now. As of the number of spans, all fields in the unit section require a unit type but we might add an only numeric field (number or count) at the beginning or end of the section. – Caroig (talk) 18:42, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

Design and Construction

[edit]
  • Specific bridge type (i.e. Pratt truss)
  • Builder
  • Date Construction Began
  • Date Construction Completed
  • Date Opened
  • Date Closed
  • Date Demolished

Commenets: There are up to five established and up to five date fields so they should cover everything here sufficiently. – Caroig (talk) 19:03, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

Current Operations

[edit]
  • Status (open to traffic, closed, demolished, etc.)
  • Average Traffic (AADT)
  • Year of Average Traffic
  • Owner or Maintaining Entity (i.e. PennDOT)
  • Toll
  • Sufficiency Rating

Comments: there are a couple fields in the access section which were added during the creation of the first version of Geoboxes to achieve comapatibilty with the {{Infobox Protected area}}. However they were hardly ever used so we can still easily rename them now. I guess there might be a field which could conatin traffic for e.g. bridges or roads and visitation for national parks, monuments etc. It would just need a better name. There might also be general state field which can be used for many historical buildings (when they're in ruins etc.). A general price or fee (or actually even a 'toll' as a synonym) seem a good idea as well, and the existing code might be used for Sufficiency Rating.

Footnotes

[edit]

Comments: it's a too specific field to be added to the geobox code, it can, nonetheless, be added manually, even with links. I've tried this, see the result. I've played a little bit with the fields, the _label is not need, it just gives a quick explanation what the field is about, just place your mouse pointer anywhere on the line with the text where there no link, e.g. the word ID, a hover appears, a user doesn't have to click on the link to know what field stands for … – Caroig (talk) 19:36, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

Wikimedia Commons

[edit]
  • Links to other images
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Skeetidot/GeoboxBridge&oldid=871657814"