Wikipedia talk:Route diagram template/Archive 5

Archive 1

←

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

Archive 6

Archive 7

→

Archive 10

Unelectrified section

Tramway de Nice network
Las Planas Comte de Falicon Le Ray Gorbella Valrose Université Borriglione Libération For Nice CP station File:25 railtransportation trans.svg) Marseille-Ventimille Railway line Gare Thiers (For Nice Ville stationFile:25 railtransportation trans.svg) Jean Médecin Points allowing half-line operation if place Masséna is closed Masséna Unelectrified section (crossing of place Masséna) Opéra-Vieille Ville Points allowing half-line operation if place Masséna is closed Cathédrale-Vieille Ville Unelectrified section (crossing of place Garibaldi) Garibaldi Acropolis Palais des Expositions Vauban St-Jean d'Angely Université St-Roch Virgile Barel St-Charles Pont Michel

I am currently working on a diagram of nice's tramway line,two sections are not electrified and rely on onboard batteries,I therefore wish to show this on the diagram. Which icons, if they exist, should I use? I considered using strait S-bahn sections to mark the difference. Thanks in advance. NicholasNCE (talk) 14:50, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

You could try using the standard horizontal dashed line section break/border marker with the captions "start of non-electrified section"/"end of non-electrified section". In the two split route "loops", it might also be useful to add the direction arrows to the two sides. —Sladen (talk) 20:50, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

Thank-you here is the final version.14:09, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

Superimposition chaos

resize the browser may cause the icons to disappear (shift)

Perhaps some of you have already noticed that after resize the browser or show/hide the collapsed section, the overlayed icons will shift their position and cannot be cured by restoring the browser size or collapsed section. Initially I thought it was my fault for adding the align=center in the BS-table. But after removing this syntax, clearing the cache and using the empty edit trick to resave the page, nothing yet solved. This problem doesn't occur in JA and ZH WPs (I have added align=center in ZH's template:BS-table, just works fine). I guess (just guess) someone has modified the codes of either superimpose or collapsible section. Has anyone figured the true cause? -- Sameboat - 同舟 (talk) 06:38, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

A test bed for you railway map experiments-

Feel free to experiment here to test your rail map building skills before doing an official Wiki article map, like as on a sand board, because it is a very tricky thing to plan out A map symbol key is set below, followed by the test the map.

Please note this page is for discussion of the template, not for experimentation. I have set up a test area in Wikipedia:Railway line template/sandbox. —  Tivedshambo  _(t/c) 22:21, 30 November 2008 (UTC)

Why not do it in your own sandbox? You can export it to Word or the like for storage if you have more than one project going or for easier mass editing eg to change all BS6 to BS8|| to make the map wider, or after using blue uZZZs in your try (as they show up) change those that seem final by "|u" to "|".--SilasW (talk) 16:38, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

Adaptation of icons

Some editors are of the opinion that the use of red and blue icons is "set in stone" as it were, and can never be used in a different manner to that which was originally envisaged. for most railway diagrams. Generally this doesn't cause a great deal of problem. Red for heavy rail, blue for light rail and tram lines. Dark colours for open, light for closed.

Problem: You need to draw a diagram which shows the following:-

1. Standard gauge railway, open to traffic
2. Standard gauge railway, closed
3. Metre gauge railway, open to traffic
4. Metre gauge railway, closed
5. Dual gauge railway, open to traffic

What grade of icon would you use for each? The diagram needs to clearly show each different gauge of railway and whether it is open or closed.

My solution is here. Mjroots (talk) 08:51, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

I know what I've written at the beginning passage about the color scheme is a bit confusing. We didn't want to discourage editor to use track colors other than red or blue. But this cannot be done without creating a completely new set of icons (>300 I guess) because the lack of interaction between SVG and HTML. Actually there's other editors have done in similar way, for e.g., {{LGV Est}}. -- Sameboat - 同舟 (talk) 09:34, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

I'm sure I've seen green icons in use somewhere on Wikipedia - long distance footpath articles? Mjroots (talk) 11:09, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

Yes, the light green File:BSicon BHF vert.svg is for footpath (it's not quite consistent within WP though) while the deep cyan green File:BSicon ugBHF.svg for unwatered canal. -- Sameboat - 同舟 (talk) 12:45, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

I think many of us believe that if whomever started these icons had realised that they would get so complex that they wouldn't have started out with such a base colour scheme (my own bugbear is that historical/closed and planned/under construction are shown the same) and the ideal would be an icon coding structure that would define and create the icon (as a code-driven svg generation) so that exactly these multiple options could be utilised without creating the geometric expansion of fixed icons (geometric because each new type requires interaction with all the older ones). There are, sometimes, reasons I therefore think the simplicity of the German solution - not being too detailed - has a benefit, though I firmly believe we should be giving as much detail as is reasonable given we are, after all, an encyclopaedia. In this example I suspect you will have to just define the details in the text, though maybe we need to have a global review of the issues? --AlisonW (talk) 13:48, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

Historical/closed and planned/under construction lines are only shown with the same colours if creators choose to do so. As long as an explanation is given with a diagram, there is no good reason that it can't be varied if necessary. Generally, the red/blue light/dark works perfectly fine, but there are occasions when it needs to be varied. Mjroots (talk) 19:00, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

Yes, they're not set in stone. But applying a different usage still requires some sort of self-defined legend like Réseau des Bains de Mer and {{LGV Est}}, maybe you shall add a guilde section in the project page. The problem exists in the metro network that each line has a specific color defined by the operator, never mind, this isn't our priority. Like DE we should make things simple rather than creating a self-complacent route map that may not be easily interpreted by causal readers. -- Sameboat - 同舟 (talk) 22:33, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

The following is in the lead of the article:-

This article is an ongoing interpretation from the original German, not yet fully Anglicised. The ad hoc creation of new templates with individual explanations has led to a need for this article to be simplified, as does the recursive referencing from some of its links.

This is exactly what I meant by my opening post in this section. The main problem seems to me to be de:Wikipedia editors, having invented the idea of icons to create railway diagrams, have a WP:OWN issue over their use. As I stated earlier, there is no good reason why the different colours can't be adapted as long as it is made clear in the diagram what each colour means. Mjroots (talk) 08:14, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

I guess the DE editors may also think that the need to establish a grammatical rule of color scheme is good for readers to understand the diagram by checking out the {{Railway_line_legend}}. But I think it's time to rephrase the reason behind the tracks color scheme and suggest the flexibility editor can have. About that italic passage, it's actually no longer true so I removed it. It's unlikely we have turning back to its original form that DE edtors established nor the DE users will fully accept our massive alteration to the project. (It seems they're adapting the overlay syntax but I'm not sure because I know no German.) The only thing we need to care is not to alter the original red set icons in Wikimedia commons without noticing the DE creators. -- Sameboat - 同舟 (talk) 09:17, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

There are several german editors that have a very strict interpretation of which icons should be used and which shouldn't. I don't agree on this being quite inventive creating new icons – for special needs or just in case someone will need them. I usally code a complete set of icons, not just exactly what I need, several hundred in total for the "red set". Changing those to fit the "blue set" is quite easy ... one by one ... and a lot to do when you have to adapt all of them.

The number increases dramatically if you decide to combine not just dark colored and light colored tracks, but red and blue (and their pale mates) as well. That was the main reason German WP contented itself to hold those sets separated. Unthinkable the amount of icons needed if we introduce a third color or even more :(

Sameboat mentioned a concern rarely talked about here: The casual readers! How shall those people understand what's going on, if all those BS-boxes use their own style to present the facts? Do you think this encyclopaedia should be understandable only for those with a degree in railway sciences? We're moving there ... Axpde (talk) 15:49, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

Axpde, I hear what you're saying about creating loads of new icons if different colour schemes were to be introduced. As with the two icons under discussion for deletion, I don't think it is such a bad thing if they are created on an "as required" basis, rather than piecemeal. I had the casual readers in mind when it was necessary to adapt the diagrams, which I why I provided a legend at the bottom of the diagram to make it clear what each colour represented. Personally, I can see the merit of using red, blue and green together if necessary, but I'm not going to alter the CFBS or RBM diagrams as that would need another new icon creating with all three colours on it. Generally, rail line diagrams should stick to the usual format, but if it is necessary to deviate from that, then that should be possible as long as it is adequately explained. Mjroots (talk) 13:18, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

Nomenclature - Flat crossing chord upper and bottom left

I need to create a heavy rail icon for a flat crossing with chords at the upper and bottom left. I see that one can use Tompw's icon generator for the task, but I am not sure what to call the file. Also, I will create a second icon with the same layout, but with a horizontal overbridge; again, what would be the correct nomenclature? --papageno (talk) 06:00, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

Would it be something like this? Or more like this (but reverse)? Or this? Axpde (talk) 16:28, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

The first one is too indistinct. The second one is correct but you need the drKRZ version which doesn't exist. The overbridge looks ok to me. Railwayfan2005 (talk) 21:48, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

I have to admit, those junctions are looking quite pretty! :) Axpde (talk) 13:51, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the help. The two composite pictures shown at right are exactly the ones I want to create. Now, what should I call them? --papageno (talk) 17:18, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

Pardon, create? They are done, obviously, as we all can see them ... and they already have names, no need to invent new ones! Axpde (talk) 23:19, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, I had thought it was a pictorial and not an actual coding representation; I now have looked at the code underneath. Axpde, it would seem the method you have used, involving multiple code lines with individual elements, to build perpendicular crossings / junctions could be used for many of the possible configurations; why then are there so many single icons for the purpose shown in the catalogue? Why not create one for my purpose, a single icon? Having seen your involvement with so many icons (congrats!), I accept I'm a bit of a newbie here, so apologies if these matters have already been addressed.--papageno (talk) 18:04, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

Papageno, I'm not sure what you're getting at here. The central icons of those two diagrams are the ones you asked for. The reason the catalogue contains lots is because there are many, many possible configurations. If integrated icons were created for larger layouts, there would be more, not less. Your request has been answered; I'm not sure what else you think you need. AlexTiefling (talk) 21:00, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

Yes, I thank axpde for providing a way to do what I need. I noticed that it used some existing icons and took several lines of BS2 code to achieve. I also notice that there are icons that depict similar configurations in one single graphic, and that require only one BS2 line of code, and that it would be a simple matter to create a new single icon for my purpose. Both approaches, re-use and new creation have merit, and either is fine by me; I just wanted to know if there is an desired preference for editors, or if it is up to an individual editor to decide what to do.--papageno (talk) 01:38, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

Guess you're talking about icons like File:BSicon KRZulg.svg and File:BSicon KRZurf.svg? The problem about those is “obvious” ... or not: The more «confusion» the less distinguishable the icon is! Combining both symbols above (what would satisfy your need) results in a nearly invisible bridge!

Of course noone is able to forbit such an icon, but we're trying to “keep it simple and smart”! Greets axp_de^Hello! 14:58, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

Thanks everyone. I have used axpde's compound suggestion, flipped around. Works fine. If anyone has the time or inclination, I would appreciate any comments on my first route diagram effort, in my sandbox, designed for Stouffville line.--papageno (talk) 22:41, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

Weird templating

I'm not sure why but a use of Template:Railway line header like here to Template:Mildura Line leads to all these links to this template. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 02:59, 26 December 2008 (UTC)

Also links to this one too. Probably the same issue. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 03:05, 26 December 2008 (UTC)

Strange. What it appears to me they're not applying the {{Railway line header}} but template:Railway line header+source code of {{Railway line header}}. Is this application done by bot or some vandaler? -- Sameboat - 同舟 (talk) 03:52, 26 December 2008 (UTC)

I have an answer to this situation. The whole "mess" actually looks okay except for Microsoft Internet Explorer. The editor(s) doesn't aware that omitting or malfunctioning the {{railway line header}} would cause the diagram row to breaks apart in IE. This did happen in French Wikipedia until I had a mass revision to their BS-header template with the syntax of railway line header. The original German creator decided to let editors to consider themselves if they want a "title text header" in their diagram thus separating the {{railway line header}} (fail-safe for IE) and {{BS-header}} (title text header). The French adopter thought it would be pointless for a standalone diagram without title text thus omitting the {{railway line header}}. -- Sameboat - 同舟 (talk) 05:58, 26 December 2008 (UTC)

Request for BSicon exdSBRÜCKE.svg

Currently there is a BSicon dSBRÜCKE.svg - the halfwidth tunnel icon. I would like to request a 'ex' (line not in use) version of it. Alternatively, could anyone suggest a way to overlap two current symbols. It will save an artist a whole lot of effort. Thanks. 리지강.wa.au _talk 17:16, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

Done. - Erik Baas (talk) 00:29, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

Thank you very much! 리지강.wa.au _talk 08:45, 2 January 2009 (UTC)

Names for non-standart colors files

Hello! Excuse me, if my question is not new - in this case, please, say to me, where this problem was discussed. Different users upload many new files with different colors: for example , , and many others (see, for example, this category). Are there any rules or recommendations for names of such files? I think, that name of file should give information about its content. I think, that we should recommend for something better, than ABZdrf RizhMZD (for example, ABZ_firstcolor_secondcolor_thirdcolor). Dinamik (talk) 14:52, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

With all these colours, doesn't this detract from the original reason why only two colours were going to be used? Quote from the project page:

In order to give reader a globalized impression, the colors of route is pre-definite (see section #colour scheme.) That means editor has no option to apply representative colors defined by railway official but to follow the color scheme set here. Heavy rail/intercity route always use the red set, metro/light rail apply the blue set.

(bold is applied by me) 리지강.wa.au _talk 15:16, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

We can prohibit non-standart colors in en-wiki, but users do new color files and upload them to commons - we can't stop it. The question is what names can we recommend for such files to make their using easier for other users in different lockal projects. Is there any page, where nomenclature is discussed? Route diagrame template, as I know, is originally de-project, but nowadays is de-facto multilingual - so I don't know, where can I read recommendations about conventional nomenclature. Dinamik (talk) 16:30, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

To be honest, I wrote that line (In order to give reader a globalized impression...) to serve as an excuse for levitating a possible overload of Wikimedia. Chris' stupidity statement in the upper section partially explains that. And I don't think that much colorfulness would be helpful. Think about the colorblind user. -- Sameboat - 同舟 (talk) 22:11, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

The main point about any use of colour is that it should be clear and obvious to readers. (Much as it sometimes seems that WP exists in order to entertain editors, it isn't!). That means that colours need to be differentiated from each other sufficiently that they will be clear on different platforms (laptops, desktops, operating systems, tablets, etc). We are not a replacement for the maps provided by a railway company but a service to users looking for information; each therefore has different requirements and needs in its maps. --AlisonW (talk) 17:17, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

We can discourage colourful RDTs here in en:, though we cannot ignore the fact that those new icons will be needed in another wiki for any reason. So we are not talking about whether those icons are to be allowed here (seems quite a consensus til now), but, in a multilingual scale, suggest how those new icons are to be named (just as the second reply of Dinamik suggested). Probably we need to notify de: too? – PeterCX&Talk 11:56, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

Increase BSpx default size

Lot of RDT issues recently. This time is a small change that affects nearly all diagrams in EN Wikipedia. If you're using IE8/Firefox/Opera/Safari and look into the diagrams using the {{BS-table/WithCollapsables}} and {{BS-table1/WithCollapsables}} will discover that their rows partially break apart.

• Special:WhatLinksHere/Template:BS-table/WithCollapsibles
• Special:WhatLinksHere/Template:BS-table1/WithCollapsibles

text note1

Surely it isn't because the text description is too long. I have been running some analysis under SilasW's request: user:sameboat/sandbox and this doesn't occur in IE7, strangely (And notice that the analysis doesn't cover the breaking within collapsible section, its much more mysterious that I'm unable to pinpoint.) I can tell someone with higher authority has touched the definition of either small font or wiki table class. The best solution would be revise the now-protected {{BSpx}} from 20px to 22px and everything will look fine. I tried 21px. That cures the breakings in IE8/Firefox but produces new breakings in IE7. =v= I got owned. -- Sameboat - 同舟 (talk) 11:30, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

I can make this happen when I change the text size to smaller or smallest within IE7. I recall about a year ago a similar discussion regarding the size of the icon to 21 or 22. Cannot find it at present, as I think AlisonW contributed at the time, maybe she can recall how it was solved then. --Stewart ^{(talk | edits)}

font-size 50%
text note1

icon size 22px
text note1

Well not the case of IE7. But I have tried to decrease the font size. But it's strange that smaller font doesn't actually solve the problem. -- Sameboat - 同舟 (talk) 12:33, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

Request for new icon for East Grinstead

Currently East Grinstead is shown by KRZBHF as per this diagram:

East Grinstead
East Grinstead East Grinstead St Margaret's Junction East Grinstead Junction East Grinstead

The problem as you can see is that the stubs of the three disused lines have to start as dark red (open).

Could we please have a similar icon but showing the lines to the west, south and east as disused? Thanks. Britmax (talk) 19:55, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

KBHFe overlays exKRZ. -- Sameboat - 同舟 (talk) 22:17, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

With the two junctions that connect the two lines, an alternative - KBHFe overlays exTBHFxu. --Stewart ^{(talk | edits)} 22:49, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for that! Britmax (talk) 23:08, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

Please note: requests for new icons should be made at WT:RDT/C. Thanks. ChrisDHDR 19:12, 14 January 2009 (UTC)

Design standards, perhaps?

User:Kevin Steinhardt/Route diagrams--a bit of feedback would be grand. Kevin Steinhardt (talk) 17:44, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

Hi Kevin, I just added some annotations of usage in German WP, is that the feedback you wanted? Thanks :) axp_de^Hello! 19:52, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

Indeed so; cheers. Kevin Steinhardt (talk) 19:58, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

Some thoughts - the general standard used for the Historic Scottish Lines includes:

• The header colour is the pregrouping company colour (i.e. CR, G&SWR, GNoSR, HR, NBR)
• Connecting lines use the right justified field and have an arrow (using {{RoutemapRoute}}) to indicate direction (i.e. are small font). Some of the earlier examples used - - instead of the arrow.
• Junctions names in italics
• Stations not part of the railway company that is the subject of the RDT has its company abbreviation or name added (in small font).

Template {{Glasgow City and District Railway}} is an example of the above. --Stewart ^{(talk | edits)} 22:39, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

No italics; no bold type; and, most certainly, none of those arrows. Kevin Steinhardt (talk) 23:06, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

Yes - Italics (where appropriate - i.e. junctions); and most definitely arrows!! --Stewart ^{(talk | edits)} 06:39, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

In German WP the BS#e-templates (and manual comments as well) use italics to indicate former or planned stations and stops. Can't remember any arrows ... axp_de^Hello! 10:24, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

We shouldn't be making use of italics to convey meaning as not all readers will be seeing that italic (it is CSS dependent which means might not appear on all platforms, etc). The arrows just annoy me as they are "stating the bleedin' obvious" most of the time. --AlisonW (talk) 12:22, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

If someone decides to use a different css where italic isn't displayed the desired way, it's not of our concern. It's the decision of this person, and he is allowed to do so. So what? axp_de^Hello! 18:59, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

About the LUECKE icons; they seem to be used both to mean interruption of a line and to show that a branch, line, etc. continues off the diagram (along with tSTR). I think that LUECKE should only be used for interruptions and that a new FADE icon could be used to show that a line continues off a diagram. ChrisDHDR 09:51, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

PS: I've made a prototype, File:BSicon FADEq.svg (). ChrisDHDR 10:07, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

Nice try, although I think there's no need for this. No track ends without any sign (at least should be added), so using a junction or crossing is enough to indicate a continuing track. At least that's the way German WP handles it, keeping the BS-boxes small and simple ;-) axp_de^Hello! 10:24, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

Tracks go 'off-screen continuation' all the time, and I've always thought it bad that people use LEUCKE after an in-tunnel section as it just looks stupid going bolder. I would also suggest, in the politest possible way, that just because German WP does rail diagrams in a particular way does not mean everyone else (WP.en WP.jp etc) has to follow suit like some slave. Just as with articles no person or group 'own' what is on any part of WP. In that light I was somewhat more than unhappy at this 'q' appearing as a suffix replacing the 'H' and creating a rash over all the route maps on my watchlist. It might have been a choice of WP.de but it wasn't a necessary action for WP.en and, as such, I would not like to see such peremptory action happen again. --AlisonW (talk) 12:17, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

Using: nothing STR LSTR tSTR FADE CONTfq

The German way might be simple but it is just looks ugly. Looking at the right:

• nothing: ugly, the German way
• STR: one of the better options
• LUECKE: wide yet incorrect usage of interruption icon
• tSTR: incorrect usage of a tunnel icon
• FADE: one of the best options, with STR

So which option do you prefer? ChrisDHDR 12:53, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

I favour STR; nothing else is required. As User:Axpde says, there should always be a symbol where tracks end, so there is no ambiguity with using normal track for a continuation off a diagram. Roads and railways don't fade away at the edges of a normal map; they end abruptly. –Signalhead ^< T > 13:36, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

Agree. STR (or tSTR after any tunneled icon) is appropreiate enough to indicate the continuation. LUECKE isn't bad conceptually but it doesn't look good enough for the t set and bad without connecting other tracks icon at the edge. -- Sameboat - 同舟 (talk) 14:39, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

sfaiac LUECKE usage as an end-of-this-routemap makes total sense as it *is* an interruption of that line, just not within the same route map but to another (which begs the obvious question of should we link 'routes off' to another map which depicts that continuation?). --AlisonW (talk) 16:04, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

Actually Chris, I have 1 more suggestion regarding the FADE. How about an actual arrowed BSicon for continuation like this -- Sameboat - 同舟 (talk) 14:47, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

I was asleep, and I missed quite a lot.

• FADE doesn't look too shabby, actually.
• I do understand that I (and a lot of people) are misusing the interruption symbols.
• Could we please agree on something before changing templates?; at any scale.
• Those (blue) arrows are just hideous, to be honest.
• The symbols already give you information (about closed stations &c.); don't repeat yourself.
• This H/q nonsense is just random; what was wrong with H?--it stood for horizontal.
• Ending connections to other lines with STR just looks weak, stringy, and not at all correct.

I think that's all. Kevin Steinhardt (talk) 15:46, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

• FADE - Yes
• To my mind LUECKE is quite understandable
• Any changes to templates has to receive concenus in the areas of concern - be it USA, UK, Historic lines, current operational routes - and not just a blanket change
• The blue arrows are NOT hideous and I think they help and add to the readibility of the template
• Closed station - not sure where that line of thought came from exBHF, eBHF, etc satisfy this - no additional text required
• H/q - this appears to be a case where a decision was made on another project / language has been applied witout any concencus
• Agreed - LUECKE or FADE (not sure how exFADE would look) - either does for me.

My thoughts --Stewart ^{(talk | edits)} 16:50, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

a) FADE would require new icons to be constructed for each of the four directions, and then applied to templates thusly. I personally think that we should all just use LUECKE.

b) Regions should, indeed, be treated as regions; however, not when it comes down to design standards, and a unified look across the Project.

c) The blue arrows distract attention away from the route diagram's simplicity; in my opinion, they should be avoided.

d) I was remarking that closed stations are sometimes annotated with a message ("(closed)", "(closed 1966)" &c.). The symbols already define the station as being not open--whether that be through closure, or the fact that the station hasn't been built yet.

e) The H/q nonsense is just another example of one Project affecting another. There was no reason for the change, and I do hope that this kind of thing does not happen again.

f) I would, personally, prefer LUECKE over FADE; and, exFADE--it might not look right.

--Kevin Steinhardt (talk) 17:38, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

@AlisonW: Maybe you did missunderstand me, I did not doom the use of LUECKE in the way you use it (wrong ;-), I only said that German WP makes very seldom use of it.

@Kevin & Stewart: What you call nonsense is part of the original guidelines, saying modifying characters conc. direction are lowercase suffixes (such as r, l, f or g). I don't know who invented the capitalizes prefix 'H', but it must have at the same time, German WP introduced the lowercase suffix 'q'. Of course we could have let everything the way it went before, everyone is allowed to name the icons just the way he likes to, putting the 'e' for end in front or the 'e' for erstwhile at the end, who cares? axp_de^Hello! 18:55, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

• Kevin and I are going to have to agree to disagree on the arrows. I beleive they enhance the readibility of the template and do not distract. Route diagrams are not all simple, and those which have may interactions are especially helped by the arrows.
• As regards the comment from Axpde, the syntax has evolved away from the original german syntax. There is no reason why english wikipedia should not develop separately from german wikipedia and the icon names differ. If they are different, it does not matter.

--Stewart ^{(talk | edits)} 19:20, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

I disagree with you Stewart; the icons need to follow a common naming system. It is already hard enough to understand what ABZlf means and having everyone do their own thing (anarchy) would just make things more complicated for the sake of not spending 2 seconds researching the naming conventions. (a good example would be the H-/-q debate going on at the moment.)

About the LUECKE/FADE debate: LUECKE is for an interruption of a line, NOT continuation of a line. It is obvious to see why when you notice that diagrams that use it all finish in some half cercle, a half cercle that should connect with another icon (like STR). FADE on the other hand clearly shows that the line continues off the diagram, does not have the double entrendre of LUECKE, and is very simple to make (3 clicks on Inkscape); so there is really no reason to not impliment it.

ChrisDHDR 20:42, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

Are you sure you want to bring gradients into the already complicated route diagram mess? I propose either LUECKE or those red arrow whatnots--but, most certainly, none blue arrow. Kevin Steinhardt (talk) 21:12, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

Railways around Cambridge
Fen Line Cambridge & St. Ives Branch River Cam Cambridge & Mildenhall Line Barnwell Junction Ipswich to Ely Line (via Dullingham) Cambridge Cambridge goods Varsity Line Cambridgeshire Guided Busway Hitchin-Cambridge Line Shelford Stour Valley Railway West Anglia Main Line

Also, here's what Template:Railways around Cambridge would look like if one replaced LUECKE with CONT. Only four symbols were already in place to use, so exLUECKE hasn't been replaced. Kevin Steinhardt (talk) 21:20, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

And, if we are going to be usin' CONT, could someone please realign the arrow head to be centered around the 50% mark?--that is to say that halfway between the base of the head and the arrow tip is dead-on the 50% vertical point...if that made sense. Kevin Steinhardt (talk) 21:39, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

It certainly looks better with CONT than with LUECKE, but I'm still of the opinion that no specific symbol is needed for lines continuing off the diagram and that STR is therefore best. –Signalhead ^< T > 21:42, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

That would just look weird, and wrong. The red arrows both provide a good substitute, as well as negating the use of those blue arrows. Kevin Steinhardt (talk) 22:12, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

That it would look "weird" is your opinion, and you're entitled to it, but can you explain why you think that it's "wrong"? –Signalhead ^< T > 22:29, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

Looking at how CONT works around Cambridge, I would suggest that (ex)CONT would be a suitable replacement for the (ex)LUECKE / {{RoutemapRoute}} combination; it has the clarity that the arrows already provide, with the advantage is that it will reduce the coding complexity. It would also mean that the arrow would be colour coded with the line (red - normal/faded & blue - normal/faded).

The H- prefix naming was well understood, the -q suffix was not - as an example, STRq did not exist until 16 August 2008 (see File:BSicon STRq.svg#File history), with HSTR having been developed in the early months of 2007. In this case H- suffix was the original convention which has been changed recently. For example HBHF was created in April 2007, in fact quite a number of H- prefix prefix icons were created in March/April 2007. I have been attempting (reading the archives to this talk to find where this change was discussed - no joy as yet).

Oh and please, please, please, no trivial minor edits - like adding blank lines to articles to make the templates display as modified in their relevant articles - just let the database catchup and clear the cache - this has happened many times during the un-necessary H to q change.

--Stewart ^{(talk | edits)} 22:41, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

Will there be t- and tex- CONT icons? --Stewart ^{(talk | edits)} 23:08, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

I will create the rest when the consensus settles. Also the 50% position of the arrow should be discussed. -- Sameboat - 同舟 (talk) 23:30, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

The 50% is just an idea; most of the pictograms have their main focus on the centre of the square--I don't see why continuation symbols should be any different. Kevin Steinhardt (talk) 01:27, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

Central-aligned the CONT set. Use &action=purge and ctrl+F5 refresh to see the updated icons. -- Sameboat - 同舟 (talk) 01:55, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

Cheers; I'll be on holiday for a few days--just so everyone knows. Kevin Steinhardt (talk) 06:23, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

Hoy~ tunneled set will follow soon. -- Sameboat - 同舟 (talk) 06:35, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

Two important notes:

1. The original naming convention states clearly that those prefixes has to be "ext" and "et" due to the fact that the BS#e-templates add an 'e' in front! I know en WP dropped the use of BS#e, but several other project make have use of it!
2. The use of 'q'-suffix started in early 2007, the oldest proof I found is dating from August 2007, when File:BSicon dSTRq.svg has become "NowCommons". http://de.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Spezial:Logbuch&type=delete&page=Datei:BSicon_dSTRq.svg

I just found the a proof, that the 'q'-suffix was prior to 'H'-prefix, just have a look at the description of File:BSicon dHSTR.svg. User:BjørnN reloaded my work using a different name, and User:Zirland deleted my work claming it was a duplicate of the new one!

So you can see, it's not me trying to push trough a new naming convention, I'm just rolling back to what it was 'before! axp_de^Hello! 10:28, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

People who stole a loaf of bread used to be hung for their crime, but we've moved on, just as we've moved way on from any earlier use of 'q' as a suffix you may have found. WP.en has been using 'H' for Horizontal for some years now, and despite the request further up this page that any further changes are discussed first I note that you are now going through lots of templates changing other icons which are perfectly OK as they currently are, instead changing them all to use yet more 'q' icons. It is clear from the discussions here that this is contentious so please halt that activity and get agreement (or otherwise) here first please. Thanks. --AlisonW (talk) 16:11, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

What?!? Bread?!? What are you talking about?!?

What about "WP.en has been using ... for some years now" ..? Bernina invented the BSicons two years ago, do you claim using those icons for longer?!?

And the icons I change are not "perfectly OK" because on all pages I visited in two dozen different projects I found not a single mention of the usage of a capital 'H' ... nowhere! So why do you claim those icons to be named correctly?

And please can you show me the diskussion on deleting File:BSicon dSTRq.svg and uploading my icon with a different name?

I'd appreciate an agreement, but yet there was noone argueing for or against any naming convention, all I read was "we have always done this that way, how can you change it" ... my argument in compliance with the orignal naming convention hasn't been countered by anyone however axp_de^Hello! 21:24, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

Agreement is easy en WP has been using H-; German WP has been using -q - not a problem, there appears to be a minority of one against how en WP has evolved to using H- - natural evolution. H- = -q and if en WP want to us it so be it; if german WP want to use -q so be it. --Stewart ^{(talk | edits)} 21:43, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

"I visited in two dozen different projects": We are not talking here about 'other' projects, but about how WP.en has taken the basic icons (acknowledged as being developed elsewhere but extended) and we've extended them - or made use of the extensions made elsewhere - so that people *on WP.en* are generally aware of their usage and existence, at least those of us making and supporting route templates. Your WP.de compliance issue is a non-issue on this project as generally we have been far more specific in what we depict on our route maps (elevated sections, stations in cuttings, light rail/underground services, etc. etc.). I have no issue whatsoever in any project making standards *for itself* but it should not try to impose those 'standards' on other projects in *any* way (imho, etc). --AlisonW (talk) 01:08, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

Count me in for a change to CONT ... those floating arrows in the text areas never made sense to me. As for the idea that all lines end in a symbol, that assumes that casual readers understand that a line ending without a symbol, that is a an STR, continues beyond the map. Geof Sheppard (talk) 08:20, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

Naming convention proposals

after a lot of thought and reading the above comments, if i had my way [like yeah . . . ], i would simplify the Icons thus: [they are for use with "mainline track" ie: "red colour". "u" would be additional [and "last"] prefix to indicate "underground/subway" lines].

• sSTR for all straight ["vertical"] track
• hSTR for all horizontal track
• cSTR for curve track

with prefixes and suffixes added accordingly.

• bSTA for "major stations"
• mSTA for "minor stations"
• jSTA for station junction where "HUB" or "CPIC" is not used

with prefixes and any suffixes added accordingly.

• sABS for single branches based on vertical track
• hABS for single branches based on horizontal track
• sABD for double branches based on vertical track
• hABD for double branches based on horizontal track

with prefixes and any suffixes added accordingly.

• ABC, ABK, ABQ, ABS, ABT, ABX and ABZ for special branches/icons

with prefixes and any suffixes added accordingly.

my prefixes, which would be placed in FRONT of the codes above:

• x for the "lighter" colour of track which i usually use to mean part time services.
• e for "dashed lines", meaning proposed services.
• z for express service stations ["does not stop here"]
• p for lines/stations w platforms in place [special]
• t for tunnel
• u for underground/subway services
• v for parallel line services
• d for "half line" icons

my suffixes pretty much follow the current usuage:

• a start
• e end
• r [go/from] right
• l [go/from] left
• f [go/from] down
• g [go/from] up

[go/from depends on orientation of main track/line]

• o vertical track overhead/station overhead
• u vertical track underneath/station underneath
• n for special curves [??] [or should it be a prefix?]

other current codes would remain: ABV, DST,INT, KRZ, ENDE; i like the "CONT" idea. i would put LUECKE to rest. i hope to put some examples of current code/ICON/my code on my user page sometime very soon.

well enough of this on christmas day. you may all go back to your dinner.

Dkpintar (talk) 15:05, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

Merry Christmas everyone!

Here my counter proposals:

1. In the original naming convention modifiers conc. direction are all suffixes, only modifiers conc. type and condition are prefixes!
2. Straight/vertical tracks are standard, so no surplus modifier is needed.
3. Curve tracks are modified by l and r suffixes , no surplus modifier is needed.
4. Tracks across are already using the q suffix, the big advantage is:
   1. Elevated tracks get a lowercase h prefix (for high level, in opposite to t for tunnel level). That was the initial and main reason for eliminating the wrong 'H' prefix, it saves the -ELEV name addition (which is strictly speaking a type modifier and should be a lowercase prefix).
5. The lowercase e prefix means erstwhile and is definitely out of question.
6. I'm not really happy about the v prefix (what does 'v' mean?), why not using two d prefixed icons instead, would save hundreds of questionable icons (and the need to find appropriate names for those ;-) ... but ok, I see no other usage for 'v'. Btw. ...
   1. I found n suffix yet only with some 'v' icons, with regular icons there is no need for those ...
7. The z (or old xp) prefix is applicable only for stations, that's rising the question whether it's sensible to have a modifier for only one purpose. I tend to give those stations a different NAME and no further modifier.
8. The p prefix shall replace the ACC named stations, did I get that right? Well, same as express stations, maybe we should leave this at the current state ... by the way:
   1. English WP makes have use of overlay icons, why don't we simply use the standard stations and overlay them with an ACC, INT, CPIC, HUB, Express or S-Bahn icon? Would save hundreds of icons ... have to get the overlay working in German templates too ...
9. Finally to xSTA and ABx: This system of railway icons was invented by German WP and that's the reason for having the icons named like BHF (Bahnhof = station), HST (Haltestelle = stop), ABZ (Abzweig = junction), KRZ (Kreuzung = crossing), ÜST (Überleitstelle = rails change) or ÜW (Überwerfungsbauwerk = flying rails/track change).

If you want to invent new names for existing icons to degermanize the names, please go all the way and don't let those icons start with "BS" (Bahnstrecke = railway track). Call them "RW" and "RR" (for BE and AE resp. - just in case you can't make the decision whether using BE or AE) and leave all German icons untouched. axp_de^Hello! 07:29, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

hello Axpde!

your comments got me to thinking more about my proposal. ive come up with a system that is totally [?] anglicised; using english for english speaking people who use this system. see below..............

• • track identifiers [prefix]
• s straight
• q horizontal
• c curved
• h elevated (former ELEV)
  • track modifiers [additional prefix]
• d half line icons
• e part-time service (lighter colour)
• k bridge
• n "90 degree" curve
• p parallel line services
• t tunnel
• u underground/subway services
• x proposed services (dashed lines)

• • place identifiers
• DEP depot
• HUB hub
• STA station
• SYM symbol
  • station identifiers [prefix]
• b major (former BHF)
• z minor (former HST)
• j junction (former CPIC)

• • track identifiers
• TRC track continuation (former CONT)
• TRD track-double branch
• TRE track ends (former ENDE)
• TRF track "fade" (former FADE)
• TRK strandard track
• TRQ special tracks
• TRS track-single branch
• TRT triangular branches
• TRW special tracks
• TRX special branches
• TRZ special branches

• • service modifiers
• a start
• e end
• f down (''d'')
• g up (''u'')
• l to left
• m middle (for jSTA)
• o vertical track overhead/station overhead
• r to right
• u vertical track underneath/station underneath

as i said in my other post, i'll put examples up on my user page within the week. happy new year to all :-)

Dkpintar (talk) 16:27, 3 January 2009 (UTC)

When you want to create your own system, don't forget to change the two initial characters from BS to whatever you like. That's all I have to add. axp_de^Hello! 16:51, 3 January 2009 (UTC)

Seriously guys, this is pure stupidity. The French did it and it makes it a nightmare to import anything. The Dutch did it as well and it's a pain. Just think about what you want to do: make a new name for every icon (10 000 is probably a good guess) by overloading the Wikimedia servers with an ENORMOUS {{#switch}}. No icon will be able to be used without being added to this gigantic database, new users will be swamped by the sea of wiki-code and mess it up, leading to the protection of the page (not to overload the job queue when this sort of thing happens) and finally the collapse of the whole system. And all this just for the sake of not being bothered to have two tabs open. Even this "English system" is so complicated that everyone will need to keep referring to the catalog to find their icons, what they already do with the current system. ChrisDHDR 20:31, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

P.S. if you want to directly import the RDT into French WP without learning their own naming convention 1 by 1, add the bis(alt) after the name of every BS row template, ie BS >> BS1bis , BS2 >> BS2bis , etc. They alternated the original BS row templates and link the icon path to a name transporting template, 1 icon per 1 template, what a wonderful revamp to the original RDT. -- Sameboat - 同舟 (talk) 22:33, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

good point, Axpde. i would think RW or RR would be good. and my plan is just proposed--an idea i had and thought i would play around with it; my suggestion for change is half-hearted. i will do a limited "translation", so to speak, and post it on my user page just for an example. so the nay-sayers above have nothing to worry about.Dkpintar (talk) 07:32, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

The nl-WP has it's own set of SPorlijn-Templates (they seems to like to have the icons 50% bigger in size), but they're using the same set of BSicons. Only the fr-WP uses a system of templates containing the BSicons, obviously the didn't like the idea using German or English identifiers ... typically French I'd say ;-)

Additional comment to make things clear: I don't support the idea to implement a complete new system just to have all names “anglicismized”, but if - go all the way and have fun with it!

My goal is it to correct the existing system slightly in order to match the original and yet only existing naming convention again, it's hard enough work to do so, believe me ... axp_de^Hello! 09:14, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

Diacritic

Since these icons now stretch across tons of projects having English names is no better than German names (they're both just as confusing to a Hungarian or a Japanese); however typing accents (Ä, Ö, and Ü) is a problem for many languages. Therefore these letters should be dropped in favour of A, O, and U. ChrisDHDR 13:18, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

Don't confuse "accents" with "Umlaute" – even though the classification is "fluent":

• In French é, è and ê are accents, i.e. variations of the vowel e,
• in German ä, ö and ü are mutated vowels ("Umlaut"),
• while in Hungarian accents and Umlaute are combined: ó is a long o, and ő is a long ö!

The German alphabet consists of more characaters than the English. BRÜCKE or Überwerfungsbauwerk are written exactly this way, you wouldn't want to write stile instead of style, would you? axp_de^Hello! 12:08, 3 January 2009 (UTC)

All I was trying to say was that Ä, Ö, and Ü should be replaced by A, O, and U; the words would still be recognisable and it would simplify life for everyone. ChrisDHDR 12:25, 3 January 2009 (UTC)

Well, User:Dkpintar wants to change everything to English, Problem solved for you? axp_de^Hello! 16:54, 3 January 2009 (UTC)

Point gotten. As an interesting after note, I'm reading Pride and Prejudice and there it's stile and not style. ChrisDHDR 19:27, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

I can't stand this as well. The accents are causing trouble to other users that usually do not type those characters. How would you feel if I create a readily handy icon BSicon_车站.svg or BSicon_駅.svg (both mean railway station.) Copy and paste the character from the catalog again and again? Could you guys used the accented alphabet as part of the file name understand the frustration accents cause? It doesn't matter you use the BHF stand for station icon because it contains no accent, we can type it w/o additional effort. -- Sameboat - 同舟 (talk) 00:58, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

Aside the fact that 'Ü' has nothing to do with accents, how about File:BSicon BRUECKE.svg? It's a simple redirect to File:BSicon BRÜCKE.svg and no need to change all those hundreds of occurances ... ;-) axp_de^Hello! 16:02, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

That's perfect! Just the solution we need. The Germans can keep their umlauts and here on en.wp the name will be in plain characters (which redirects to the German name). ChrisDHDR 18:33, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

Fine, as long as no Commons sysop nominates deletion, we should create the diacritic-free redirects there. -- Sameboat - 同舟 (talk) 12:22, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

Ok, but once again Ü is no variation of U, if you want to substitute the Umlaut, use UE instead! axp_de^Hello! 16:40, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

You could insist. But the pronunciation indicated by diacritic varies between languages. Someday someone would create a set of redirect without the knowledge of the icon creator's native language (= misinterpretation of the diacritics or plain transition like me: U >> Ü.) So we still have to emphasis this: do not use the diacritic alphabets for foreign Wikipedian's sake, if that file is going to be uploaded in Commons. -- Sameboat - 同舟 (talk) 09:43, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

CONT continued

PLEASE STOP ADDING THE CONT ICONS FOR THE MOMENT UNTIL THE ISSUE HERE IS RESOLVED. Thank you.

I'm back after Christmas, and I see that a majority of the folk 'ere have agreed on the CONT idea. I am also in agreement with changing LUECKE to CONT, and I wonder if we should begin with the transition. Kevin Steinhardt (talk) 18:34, 28 December 2008 (UTC)

I have a work list of housekeeping on the Historic Scottish lines over the next few weeks. As I work through the RDT, I will be LUECKE/{{RoutemapRoute}} >> CONT. Other bits also need address to bring all the Scottish Historic templates to the same standard - some are still in the old style table list (two converted today). Probably HR, GNoSR, CR, G&SW and NBR in that order. --Stewart ^{(talk | edits)} 19:47, 28 December 2008 (UTC)

Right-o. Now--what are we goin' to do about these text formatting standards? Everyone okay with normal text (for stations), and small text (for everything else)? Kevin Steinhardt (talk) 19:56, 28 December 2008 (UTC)

No - normal italics for junctions; small left to additional detail to a station of feature (using the piping); small right justified for connecting lines (also using the piping). --Stewart ^{(talk | edits)} 20:04, 28 December 2008 (UTC)

Small text for junctions; small text (using the pipe) for other things; small text for connecting lines, with CONT of course. Kevin Steinhardt (talk) 20:18, 28 December 2008 (UTC)

We will have to disagree on junctions. If you want to use small (piped text) do so, but normal italics for me. --Stewart ^{(talk | edits)} 20:43, 28 December 2008 (UTC)

Small text for everything except stations; junctions can be styled with italic text. Question: these italic texts--are they piped, or as big as the stations? Kevin Steinhardt (talk) 20:54, 28 December 2008 (UTC)

Big (normal) as in stations - see {{Bridge of Weir Railway}} as an example. --Stewart ^{(talk | edits)} 21:20, 28 December 2008 (UTC)

Could we all not have right-aligned text? Kevin Steinhardt (talk) 21:26, 28 December 2008 (UTC)

How about this solution:

• Stations as text
• Junctions, bridges, tunnels, and other features as note1 in italics
• the lengths for the bridges, tunnels, etc. as note2 in brackets
• other lines as note1 with CONT and a hyphen if necessary

ChrisDHDR 21:08, 2 January 2009 (UTC)

How about this solution:

• Stations as text - YES - assuming you are refering to the field called name.
• Junctions, bridges, tunnels, and other features as note1 in italics - Field called name would be better, but italics to differentiate from station names
• the lengths for the bridges, tunnels, etc. as note2 in brackets - given above would be better as note1
• other lines as note1 with CONT and a hyphen if necessary - note2 without hyphen would look better as connecting lines would not get hidden (camouflaged) amongst other detail.

--Stewart ^{(talk | edits)} 21:44, 2 January 2009 (UTC)

How about normal text for stations, and piped left small text for everything else? Kevin Steinhardt (talk) 00:38, 3 January 2009 (UTC)

The field "name" should contain all named operation facilities (all "stations and stops", but named junctions as well, i.e. everything directly related to the railroad track itself), everything else (tunnel, bridges, streets, rivers, and crossing, branching or continued lines) goes to field "note" (i.e. everthing aside the track small sized). This way the track itself and everything else aside are distinguishable at first sight. axp_de^Hello! 12:53, 3 January 2009 (UTC)

P.S.: The right aligned second "note" is only for short additional information as length of tunnel or bridges, or height above mean sea level. axp_de^Hello! 16:57, 3 January 2009 (UTC)

.........And by putting connecting lines into Note2 they are also distinguishable. --Stewart ^{(talk | edits)} 13:18, 3 January 2009 (UTC)

As you can see in the example below, having the names of other lines as note2 creates A LOT of unnecessary white space. If you want to have other lines as note2, then the name will have to be dropped in favour of the last station of that line, or, in the case of a crossing, the two end stations separated by an en dash. Also, having features as italic note1 makes sure that they are not confused with stations (italic name isn't very effective). Stations themselves could be disambiguated between major stations and minor ones by using bold (like at fr.wp) however the icons themselves could be considered enough (BHF/HST). ChrisDHDR 13:41, 3 January 2009 (UTC)

Not only French WP, German WP also uses bold to indicate major stations where important railway tracks are connected, such as de:Köln Hauptbahnhof. All other stations are written in normal font-weight – stops (HST) are always normal font-weight of course. Italics is used to indicate former or planned stations, stops, lines, whatever. axp_de^Hello! 20:25, 3 January 2009 (UTC)

Example line (used {{Prettytable}} to show the lining up)
to London The long-place-name and very-long-place-name line Major city Minor station Some bridge 1000m Some bridge (1000m) Wessex–Kent

Example line (using {{Railway line header}})
to London The long-place-name and very-long-place-name line Major city Minor station Some bridge 1000m Some bridge (1000m) Wessex–Kent

Example line (using {{Railway line header}})
to Another line The long place name and The long connecting line name Major city Minor station Some bridge 1000m x x Some bridge (1000m) Wessex–Kent

Long place names and line names create white space, not the layout. This example shows the width is determined by the long place name and connecting line name. White space is useful in emphasising / hightlighting features.

This works at {{Sutherland and Caithness Railway}}; {{Greenock and Ayrshire Railway}}; {{Bridge of Weir Railway}}; {{Sutherland Railway}}. If fact all the Historic Scottish lines have followed this and it works.

The RDT system has evolved. CONT evolved it. It has evoled in a way that works with the Scottish Historic Lines; it has evolved in a different way in the Hong Kong lines; and yet another way in Germany. It ain't broke, it is evolving. Just like evolution it will develop in different directions in different areas.

Kevin has views about the way it should be done in the area he works - it works for him - so be it; I have different views in the areas I work - it works for me - so be it; Axpde has another set of views for German WP - it works in Germany for him - so be it.

This whole debate is distracting us from adding more encyclopedic information which we should get back to. --Stewart ^{(talk | edits)} 17:41, 3 January 2009 (UTC)

Of course every wp has evolved it's own style, but in English WP all those style are mixed, since everyone translating his own article to English will want to continue to use their home made style ... a babylonian muddle will follow ;-) axp_de^Hello! 20:25, 3 January 2009 (UTC)

So be it - those in North America will apply a different interpretation to thier use of the standards; those in Scandinavia a different one; those in the Far East. There are millions of contributors, many of whom will not see the orginal german WP setup, but thrid, fourth, or even fifth generation interpretation. Roads and Canals have split off and evolved for the original seed. German WP should be proud that they have developed a family which has developed a life of its own. I know of some templates which have combined the RDT and Waterways conventions.

If it becomes a Babylonian muddle so be it - although I would call it evolution and diversity. We already have differing standards in language - US and UK English spelling. WP articles and templates are not owned by anyone. Different styles should be encouraged and celebrated, not put down and consequently putting off contributors. --Stewart ^{(talk | edits)} 20:38, 3 January 2009 (UTC)

So--let's all stick with what we've got, not get into any (more) formatting wars, and get back to the addition of encyclopedic knowledge. Agreed? Kevin Steinhardt (talk) 20:54, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

Agreed --Stewart ^{(talk | edits)} 21:53, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

Last proposal

If this one doesn't pass, I'll give up. These are the standards of the French wikipedia. They are clear, precise, stop confusion and work perfectly. They are:

• stations in normal text, major stations in bold
• all other features (tunnels, bridges, crossings, etc.) are in note1 italics
  • the distances of these are given in brackets as a note2
• branches to other lines are a note2 and are under the form "to [[Line name|City in that general direction (not necessaraly on that line)]]"
• apart from stations, non-existent and planned features are also gray

A good example would be Ligne de la Maurienne. ChrisDHDR 17:09, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

No agreement or objection. Because it isn't something that should be forced (guideline) but a suggestion of format/layout. But I would like to say currently many users (especially for French) has the trouble of dealing with the time/distance column. It's insufficient. I suggest add an extra {{{#}}} (parameter) between time/distance and main text column to act as either time or distance case. -- Sameboat - 同舟 (talk) 09:53, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

Well, since it looks like there are no objections, this will become this the official policy. ChrisDHDR 17:45, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

There are objections, but I doubt that we will find a worldwide compromise. For example note2 is not designed to hold more text than a height (of the station) or a length (of the bridge/tunnel). Distances have it's own field between icons and name. And why have annotations small and italic? How do you display former stations, same as those in service?

I guess people are tired of debating ... axp_de^Hello! 23:20, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

Sorry, I used the wrong word: when I said distance, I meant length. And, as stated, planned/former stations would appear in grey. ChrisDHDR 17:54, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

New parameter for BS row templates

{{BS-map |title=[[user:sameboat/x2]] |title-bg=white |legend=0 |collapsible=0 |map=
{{BS-colspan}}
{{user:sameboat/x2|STR|dist.|Text|note1|note2|time}}
{{user:sameboat/x2|BHFq|0km|Stationnn|transferrr|Global Streettt|0min}}
{{BS-colspan}}
}}

{{user:sameboat/x2|ID1|dist.|Text|note1|note2|time}}

{{BS-map |title=[[user:sameboat/x2]], {{{2}}} & {{{6}}} blanked |title-bg=white |legend=0 |collapsible=0 |map=
{{BS-colspan}}
{{user:sameboat/x2|BHFq||text|note1|note2|}}
}}

{{BS-map |title={{[[Template:BS|BS]]}}, {{{2}}} blanked |title-bg=white |legend=0 |collapsible=0 |map=
{{BS|BHFq||text|note1|note2}}
}}

After dealing with French RDT I think that 1 single time/distance case is insufficient and a separated column is needed. (Writing time and distance in the same column might cause the text returns if any space exists, thus the track (icons) breaks.) The French use the note2 but it is still possible that column is sometimes occupied for other purpose. My sandbox template x2 added a new parameter between d/t and main text cases. I add the latest parameter {{{6}}} of sequential parameter (after note2 {{{5}}} of {{BS}}) so this will not ruin the layout of existing diagrams once the change is made. Comments or ideas please. -- Sameboat - 同舟 (talk) 10:24, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

P.S. removal of obsoleted parameters {{{km}}} and {{{HI}}}. -- Sameboat - 同舟 (talk) 03:07, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

It seems weird that the time is shown out of place when everything else is shown as it is when editing and viewing. What we could do would be to use an AWB bot to go through all the pages and change them to a temporary template, and then change it back to the (then changed) BS# template (like what they did at {{Infobox French commune}}). ChrisDHDR 17:34, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

• Halt. No more supporter, considering the mass revision to all RDT required. Writing dist./time in the same column doesn't look bad per revised example . -- Sameboat - 同舟 (talk) 01:39, 19 January 2009 (UTC)