Commons:Featured picture candidates/Image:Paris RER.svg

Image:Paris RER.svg and Image:Paris RER.png, not featured

- Direct SVG download. Direct PNG download (3.7 MB).

•  Info created, uploaded & nominated by Pabix.
•  Support -- ♦ Pabix ^ℹ 11:45, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
•  Comment -- MediaWiki indicates transparency with a checkerboard; Since this file was made with Inkscape, you would better use this software to appreciate it fully. ♦ Pabix ^ℹ 11:51, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

  Note:Opera browser supports SVG fully! I just discovered it. ♦ Pabix ^ℹ 15:04, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

•  Support --DTA 15:57, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
•  Strong oppose. A high resolution file of this picture must be excellent and FP, but this one is unreadable, so unuseful! El ComandanteHasta ∞ 15:59, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

  Comment : this is a SVG file, hence this is not a traditional picture file, you can select your zoom level how you want, up to 3600 times. But you should view it with inkscape. I could make a PNG file, but it would not be such a good idea I think. ♦ Pabix ^ℹ 16:29, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

  I don't know how SVG files work, but if it can be used in Wikimedia projects, directly read in the navigator, I don't think it has its place in Commons, or at least in the list of FP. El ComandanteHasta ∞ 19:49, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

  It can be used in Wikimedia projects since several months due to a Mediawiki new feature, but it won't be well-rendered without software. Your comments are strange, since many people here want absolutely to have vector graphics for schemas. ♦ Pabix ^ℹ 05:02, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

  I've said that it is really a good work that must be a FP if it can be read directly into the navigator, because as it is now, I can't use it without an external software like Inkscape, and I think FP must can be read directly into the Wiki interface. Why would a PNG version be a bad idea? El ComandanteHasta ∞ 17:28, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

  PNG is not nearly as scalable as SVG. When you resize a PNG, bad things can happen while a SVG would retain all it's properties. And MediaWiki supports SVG now, FP never specifies what format to use although it should be easy to make a copy without the transparency... Sasquatch 03:30, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

  You have a PNG version here ♦ Pabix ^ℹ 06:33, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

•  Oppose no matter which way I try to zoom the picture, I still can't read the station names. --Boivie 19:51, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

  Did you use Inkscape? The used font is Bitstream Vera Sans, and I think Arial should be used in replacement if needed to. ♦ Pabix ^ℹ 04:59, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

•  Oppose--Lmbuga ^{gl, pt, es: contacta comigo} 20:32, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
•  Support It's great. Jon Harald Søby 11:24, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
•  Oppose I think I need a bigger screen Michiel1972 21:29, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
•  Support --Luc Viatour 04:47, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
•  Oppose --DiTaeg 09:15, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

  Some suggestions to improve the file? ♦ Pabix ^ℹ 10:40, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

•  Support My browser (Opera) can easily zoom right in so I can see all the details just fine. If you have decent SVG software something like this is definitely useful (though I'm not in Paris), and it's well presented.--Konstable 12:05, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

 Info Nomination of PNG version too, but the file is too big to be thumbnailed by MediaWiki, just click on the link. ♦ Pabix ^ℹ 06:36, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

• Comment. Why didn't you change the framing? The left and right sides are unuseful, and reduce the quality of the thumbnail. If it's changed, I will support your great work. El ComandanteHasta ∞ 16:52, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

  In fact, SVG enables you to define the page contours. So the thumbnail seems to be cropped. In fact, when you open the file it is complete. I put the entire image into the PNG file in order not to lose anything (region's contours, it could be used again for other cards for instance). ♦ Pabix ^ℹ 06:42, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

•  Support Very nice work! FiP 13:49, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
•  Support. Yet to see an oppose that will be listened to, come promotion time. Well done. James F. (talk) 08:52, 24 June 2006 (UTC)
•  Oppose --- gildemax 20:59, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

  Some suggestions to improve the file? ♦ Pabix ^ℹ 10:40, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

•  Oppose As I'm graduated in cartography and had to make different kinds of maps using professional software, let me make some comments about the finishing touch that makes the difference between a good map and an excellent, or for my part featured, map.

  Vectors that show lines or arcs that are connected in the real world should also be connected in the map: see for example the lines between Chantilly-Gouvieux - Orry-La-Ville-Coye, Vincennes - Fontenay-sous-Bois, Brétigny - Marolles-en-Hurepoix and numerous other examples. Not only does that look not finished, it also might be confusing about the connectivity of the railroads there. It is also generally agreed that, if a label is to be placed above another object that has a same kind of color (same darkness for example), that it should be "masked" (a small white space around the characters) to increase readability. This has not happened for example with Nogent Les-Perreux, where the 't' is practically not readable. Lines that indicate municipalities are also not always connected as they should be: for example near aéroport C.de Gaulle. Before I'd vote support, and I'm sure other cartographers would agree with me, all these inaccuracies should be resolved. Nice work nonetheless, it just isn't finished. Tbc 10:18, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

  Thanks for your comments. I updated SVG version. Will update PNG soon. ♦ Pabix ^ℹ 22:19, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

•  Oppose -- Sigfrid 12:20, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

  Some suggestions to improve the file? ♦ Pabix ^ℹ 10:40, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

•  Oppose -- Urban 03:28, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

  Some suggestions to improve the file? ♦ Pabix ^ℹ 10:40, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

•  Oppose --> Untidy lines (like those around Achères Grand Cormier for example). However, keep up the good work. Snowwayout 22:42, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

   Done ♦ Pabix ^ℹ 15:36, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

Voting ended on 11:45, 6 July 2006 (UTC) votes after this time are invalid

 Neutral --> Good clean up job. Snowwayout 02:43, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

•  Support We need more great SVGs like this! — Erin (talk) 08:58, 7 July 2006 (UTC)
•  Strong oppose --Broc 19:19, 7 July 2006 (UTC)
•  Support We can zoom now :)--Hi-tacks 09:39, 9 July 2006 (UTC)
•  Info I updated the version with new parameters in SVG file. PNG version has been updated too. ♦ Pabix ^ℹ 11:00, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

  Untidy lines have been corrected, colors have been improved for rivers (less dark). ♦ Pabix ^ℹ

•  Info If you have an old computer, PNG file could be too big to view it (sorry) ♦ Pabix ^ℹ 10:41, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
•  Support Med 10:43, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Result: 7  Support, 9  Oppose and 0  Neutral => not featured. -- Lycaon 10:38, 27 July 2006 (UTC)