Template talk:GPX

Does Winnipeg/Gpx belong to article space?
I just stumbled upon Winnipeg/Gpx, which contains just XML data. Is it an accepted convention? GPX data is great, but is there not a better place than article space to put them? Maybe Wikimedia Commons? That would keep article space clean, and allow the GPX data to be reused between languages. Nicolas1981 (talk) 09:03, 15 August 2013 (UTC)


 * There are many such files. I stumbled on one that was over a megabyte, don't recall where.
 * My guesses would be that this data belongs on Wikidata and that, since it is used for mapping the place to discuss it here is Wikivoyage talk:Dynamic maps Expedition. Pashley (talk) 10:30, 15 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Apparently there are 7 such files: Category:Gpx_data. They are the only articles that are not human-readable, so if they stay I will have to modify the algorithm of OxygenGuide, the offline Wikivoyage. Nicolas1981 (talk) 12:34, 15 August 2013 (UTC)
 * I think it would be good if they had their own naming such as GPX:pagename. --Traveler100 (talk) 16:01, 15 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Sorry, could someone explain what GPX is and what it does? Texugo (talk) 16:24, 15 August 2013 (UTC)
 * They are for drawing a path or route on a map. For example on the page Rheinsteig click the map icon top right; the blue line marking the hike trail is defined by the gpx file. On Winnipeg I believe it is marking the neighbourhoods on the map. --Traveler100 (talk) 16:34, 15 August 2013 (UTC)
 * I think they should get a separate namespace, or be moved to a shared repository like Wikidata or Commons. I can envision loads of these existing in the future (unless we come up with a better way to pull up article boundaries for dynamic maps), and they don't belong in the mainspace. --Peter Talk 00:53, 16 August 2013 (UTC)
 * I wanted to try moving Winnipeg/Gpx to GPX:Winnipeg, but even before moving it seems that the track is not displaying correctly, there is probably a bug right now. Let's try again when things are working properly, so that we can make sure we did not break the feature. Nicolas1981 (talk) 07:52, 16 August 2013 (UTC)
 * It displays fine for me. What problem are you seeing? --Peter Talk 08:36, 16 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Oh yes, it is working :-) Nicolas1981 (talk) 09:09, 16 August 2013 (UTC)

First, are we OK that for now GPX files should be moved from Sometown/Gpx to GPX:Sometown? If we agree on this, I guess it can be done quickly. The path is configured in the PHP script at this line: https://github.com/nicolas-raoul/PoiMap2/blob/master/poimap2.php#L121, so this would need to be modified at the same time as the pages are moved, by Joachim I guess because only him can modify the PHP script. Nicolas1981 (talk) 09:14, 16 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Don't we need to get GPX configured as a namespace first? LtPowers (talk) 13:05, 16 August 2013 (UTC)
 * 'GPX:Sometown', I think is a good solution. If the files are moved, I will adjust the path immediately. Please note . -- Joachim Mey2008 (talk) 16:45, 16 August 2013 (UTC)
 * You are right, LtPowers! Does anyone here have the ability to create the GPX namespace? Or do we have to create a Bugzilla ticket? Rather than pesting the already-busy WMF staff, how about using the "Module" namespace until we have a solid base of GPX tracks? I also asked at Commons. I just realized that visitors click "Random page" they might land on a GPX file, which is not a great thing. Nicolas1981 (talk) 07:21, 19 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Another option is to save the GPX files in the File:namespace. Here is an example. -- Joachim Mey2008 (talk) 17:39, 19 August 2013 (UTC)
 * What do people think of this? I'd really like to hear more opinions. The advantage of using the filespace is that we already have it, and that would be simple. Using a new gpx: namespace would be cleaner, and possibly help us keep better track of uploads (which we mostly don't want at present). Putting the GPX files on Commons might solve both problems, but that means we'd have to deal with their cumbersome upload process each time we want to edit one... Actually, that's probably the best reason to create a GPX namespace, which would allow us to keep guides and map paths information separate, while still allowing easy editing. --Peter Talk 20:12, 19 August 2013 (UTC)
 * I haven't followed the specifics of "GPX" development, but if there is any chance of sharing these files across language versions let's just use "File" and upload them to Commons. If they are always language specific then a new namespace would make sense if there are going to be thousands of these files and they aren't going to be replaced by a different technical solution in 1-2 years.  If we're only talking about a few hundred files, or if there is a chance something new will replace them in 1-2 years, let's re-use an existing namespace. -- Ryan &bull; (talk) &bull; 20:34, 19 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Text files aren't usually considered to be in scope at Commons. This may be a special case, but it'd have to be approved by the community first, I think.  LtPowers (talk) 21:42, 19 August 2013 (UTC)


 * People at Commons seem to agree with the idea, and created this Mediawiki enhancement request. It will probably take time, though. I don't know how I managed to miss the "File:" namespace, that's obviously where GPX files belong until Commons can receive them :-) Nicolas1981 (talk) 01:44, 20 August 2013 (UTC)
 * I tried to upload Winnipeg.gpx here, but I receive an error: "Permitted file types: png, gif, jpg, jpeg, tiff, tif, xcf, pdf, mid, ogg, ogv, svg, djvu, ogg, ogv, oga, flac, wav, webm.". Moving to the "Module" namespace does not work either: "The desired destination uses a different content model. Can not convert from wikitext to Scribunto.". Moving to "Template" worked: Template:Winnipeg/Gpx. It is clearly a dirty hack as GPX are not templates, but I think it is better than displaying non-readable XML as articles. Any opposition to moving all GPX files to "Template"? Nicolas1981 (talk) 05:44, 22 August 2013 (UTC)
 * I uploaded a GPX file in the files name space . This is somewhat cumbersome. It needs to be uploaded first a PNG. Later, the GPX data can be inserted into the section "GPX". - The template name space seems easier to handle with. -- Joachim
 * No problems with me either way. It'll be at Template:Gpx/Winnipeg though. There's a lot of KML files (possibly Google traced though) at Wikipedia too, no idea whether depositing them at Commons or a filespace was ever brought up. -- torty3 (talk) 13:26, 28 August 2013 (UTC)
 * If they are going to be in the Template namespace, can we set up a category and get in the habit of using so that a complete list of these files can more be easily found? Texugo (talk) 13:43, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

Future plans
Host GPX data at either Commons or Wikidata, related,.