Talk:BSicon/Renaming/BUE

BUE, set f & mixed versions

Meanwhile here’s what you requested: A brand new  (fSTR+BUEq), instead of renaming  (fBUE) to the deteriment of its uses elsewhere.

-- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 15:09, 24 June 2021 (UTC)

Your example is not thought through, not well enough. My tone is ok, if you feel offended, please note that this is your interpretation of my writing. You do not have to discuss with me, you're the one who started the discussion. But onto to the subject matter:

The reason a suffix q makes no sense at all rarely sense with BUE is that it basically implies a crossing (KRZ). You can infer the simple, straight track variants from the KRZ ones and will (hopefully) notice your error. Set f differs from standard set and set u in the respect that they do not symbolize rail tracks, thus any BUE met on set f lines needs to be rotated 90° in relation to the standard set and set u.

rarely sense meant: Simple 90° KRZ mixed icons cope without q suffixed variants, because they coincide with KRZ icons from another set and vice versa - example:  (mKRZ) and  (umKRZ) - mKRZq not necessary in this case.. Yes, there may be special cases where you need it, but not for the simple ones. --Cmuelle8 (talk) 15:38, 24 June 2021 (UTC)

Also look at real world pictures of railroad crossings in the world, and those in Germany. --Cmuelle8 (talk) 15:22, 24 June 2021 (UTC)

 (BUE) and  (uBUE) let you infer the standard orientation with respect to the rail tracks. --Cmuelle8 (talk) 15:25, 24 June 2021 (UTC)

In Germany this would imply a gating on the railway track, not on the crossing line. Because if you approach a railway crossing there (from a road!), the larger extent of the cross aligns with upward and downward (from sky to earth), not left to right. Crosses of pictures in other countries however have the larger extent running left to right (which is the reason why icons from user axpde (who probably is german based) have been re-uploaded, overwriting his versions from 2009 with 90° rotated ones of the cross - please be patient, I'll link some of the icons here). --Cmuelle8 (talk) 15:30, 24 June 2021 (UTC)

One example among others, coming in handy here:  (uBUEq) (2012 version, current uploaded by you), but the former version from Axpde uploaded in 2009 had just the cross rotated 90° - I don't judge which version is right or wrong, fact is they both exist and should be named appropriately. Your version has the benefit that it is in harmony with the through variants, which is why I consider it an international version, please note  (BUE-sv) and  (BUE-us) already are localized variants with respect to signaled rail crossings in the BSicon sets. --Cmuelle8 (talk) 16:04, 24 June 2021 (UTC)

Lets take  (ufKRZ+BUE), you can see that it is the same as  (uBUE) except for the trail (green line). If you want to get an across version (of the former), this is  (fuKRZ+BUE), not   (ufKRZq+BUE) and not   (ufKRZ+BUEq). --Cmuelle8 (talk) 15:47, 24 June 2021 (UTC)

Consider  (uBUEq) the version with signaled crossing of  (uSTRq), likewise I would expect  (fBUEq) as version with signaled crossing of  (fSTRq) (with 90° rotated cross with respect to  (uBUEq), because fSTRq is not a rail track, as mentioned above) --Cmuelle8 (talk) 16:14, 24 June 2021 (UTC)

Lets take  (ufKRZ+BUE) again, but mix with the standard set, this is  (mfKRZ+BUE), footpath top-bottom:  (fmKRZ+BUE) (this is an across version of the former, but using q for naming is not necessary). Just as

•  (uBUEq) is a version without the through line of  (fuKRZ+BUE) (or similar  (uSKRZ-GDBUEq) (which should be SuKRZ-GD+BUE) and
•  (uBUE) is a version without the other line of  (ufKRZ+BUE), and
•  (BUE) is a version without the other line of  (mfKRZ+BUE), (or similar  (SKRZ-G2BUE)),
•  (fBUE) should be a version without the other line of  (fmKRZ+BUE).

--Cmuelle8 (talk) 16:39, 24 June 2021 (UTC)

And  (fBUEq) should be a version without the through line of  (mfKRZ+BUE) --Cmuelle8 (talk) 16:54, 24 June 2021 (UTC)

done. --Cmuelle8 (talk) 17:05, 24 June 2021 (UTC)

By what rationale in fSTR+BUEq does q only refer to the part following +? Is this documented somewhere? If this isn't defined or handled always like this by convention, it is ambiguous to fSTRq + BUEq.. (and considering that BUE has a through line rail track some could interpret it as walking on rail tracks, I suppose - please don't laugh, there actually are examples of green line and blue line (foot+light rail) shared tracks, side by side, each 50px wide (half of standard track width) -- but then, u set is also used for navigable water it seems, maybe these shared tracks are only used in that respect and symbolize a footpath on navigable riverbank.. ). --Cmuelle8 (talk) 17:51, 24 June 2021 (UTC)

fSTR, fSTRq with rail crossing symbol - 3 use-cases, 4 icon-variants

1.) set f is primarily intended for footpaths. Thus, if depicted with a symbol of rail crossing signal on its "line", the "other line" is a rail track (regardless of whether that other line is depicted), and as laid out above,

•  (fBUE) should depict  (fSTR) with a 90° rotated rail crossing in relation to  (BUE) (compare  (STR))
• likewise,  (fBUEq) should depict  (fSTRq) with a 90° crossing symbol in relation to  (BUEq) (compare  (STRq))

2.) As a second use-case there are route diagrams (mis- or re-) using set f not as footpath or trail but as a color variant for a rail, light rail or tram line, for example. This brings about the question how  (fSTR) with a crossing symbol equally aligned as for  (BUE) /  (STR) pair should be titled.

3.) The variants described in 2. do coincide with another use-case: In some countries the longer side of real rail-road crossing sign objects is oriented upside-down, not left-right. For these countries localized variants of  (BUE) are needed, like  (BUE-sv) for Sweden and  (BUE-us) for US.

Icon media file titles, inferable from above are

for 2.) fBUE +f, fBUEq +f EDIT: BUE f, BUEq f (the latter similar to  (BUEq yellow))

extending to KRZ root, with the rail line shown: fmKRZ+BUE +f, mfKRZ+BUE +f EDIT: mKRZ+BUE f+crimson, mKRZ+BUEq f+crimson

taking Talk:BSicon/Colors/Archive_1#RizhMZD into account gives:

suffix  +f titles icons with the "other line" colored set f green,

so fmKRZ+BUE +f would result in a mono-colored set f green version and mfKRZ+BUE +f simply equal mfKRZ+BUE

• mKRZ+BUE +f, mKRZ+BUE crimson+f in that respect would be other names for  (mfKRZ+BUE), and
• umKRZ+BUE +f another name for  (ufKRZ+BUE) (second set color exchanged)

addendum:

• but mKRZ+BUE f+, mKRZ+BUE f+crimson   ≠⇒    (fmKRZ+BUE)
  because f in root's prefix denotes set f and not just color of set f

set f implies an icons usability as footpath symbol, just as set u implies usability for light rail primarily

color of set f is not bound to that implication (it coincides, often, but is not a necessity)

these are the reasons why

• mKRZ+BUEq +f, mKRZ+BUEq crimson+f are other names for  (fmKRZ+BUE)

and why fmKRZ+BUE is, by definition, not polymorph to both mKRZ+BUE f+crimson and mKRZ+BUEq crimson+f

.. similarly for mfKRZ+BUE --Cmuelle8 (talk) 06:23, 26 June 2021 (UTC)

these peculiarities are a non-issue using localized suffix below, it seems.. --84.135.126.233 14:53, 25 June 2021 (UTC)

for 3.) fBUE-de, fBUEq-de

similarly extending to KRZ root: fmKRZ+BUE-de, mfKRZ+BUE-de

If localization is to be avoided, the first seems more promising. It 'works' only, if  f,  +f (note the space) and similar are consistently used/interpreted as a color spec, like  +teal or  +yellow for instance. A possibility to make a sheer f in the color spec more descriptive is using fgreen (or fcolor, thinking of g, u pendants) instead. This served the purpose of setting apart usage in color spec and usage as set descriptor in root prefix better, for instance BUE fgreen vs fBUE.

fSTR+BUEq may not be needed and eventually problematic: If percepted as a combination of two, this already is realized with  (fmKRZ+BUE) (likewise fSTRq+BUE /  (mfKRZ+BUE) pair). --Cmuelle8 (talk) 07:59, 25 June 2021 (UTC)

2.) has/had issues at second thought, documented in place, above. summary: if a color spec suffix is used with set mixed, which is the reference color to exchange? --84.135.126.99 11:16, 25 June 2021 (UTC)

Talk:BSicon/Colors/Archive_1#RizhMZD dealt with the question - EDIT above revised..

The archive link has preceding sections on renaming icons that only focus on the color property of set f. These did not (need to) look into implications caused by other properties. set f green as a color spec and f as root prefix were swapped arbitrarily there, without encountering conflict. These were all icons usable as footpath or green-colored rail line interchangeably, defined by context. With fBUE this is different - this is an icon where usage as footpath needs a different graphic as compared to usage as green-colored rail line. --84.135.126.233 13:56, 25 June 2021 (UTC)

addendum added above to explain why

• fmKRZ+BUE is not ambiguous to mKRZ+BUE f+crimson, mKRZ+BUEq crimson+f
• and similarly why mfKRZ+BUE not ambiguous to mKRZ+BUE crimson+f, mKRZ+BUEq f+crimson

with the default color spec 'crimson' omitted that is

• fmKRZ+BUE is not ambiguous to mKRZ+BUE f+, mKRZ+BUEq +f
• and similarly why mfKRZ+BUE not ambiguous to mKRZ+BUE +f, mKRZ+BUEq f+

harder to read. --Cmuelle8 (talk) 06:23, 26 June 2021 (UTC)

Gallery

crimson can be omitted when used as a default color:

• f+ is brief for f+crimson
• +f is brief for crimson+f

titles with primary focus on symbol's usage as footpath, emphasized by f in root elements' prefix, are linked to one of the below, e.g.  (fmKRZ+BUE)

• 
  fKRZm
• 
  KRZ+BUEmg f+
• 
  KRZ+BUEmq f+

• 
  fmKRZ
• 
  mKRZ+BUE f+
• 
  mKRZ+BUEq f+

• 
  mfKRZ
• 
  mKRZ+BUE +f
• 
  mKRZ+BUEq +f

• 
  mfKRZm
• 
  KRZ+BUEmg +f
• 
  KRZ+BUEmq +f

Solution

The European standard for a railway crossing warning sign () is for the long axis to be aligned horizontally, parallel to the rail line. Germany, however, has the long axis aligned vertically. Therefore, the standard BSicon should be  (BUE), whereas an icon with the cross-buck rotated 90° should be a German variant  (BUE-de) , akin to the Swedish  (BUE-sv) and American  (BUE-us) versions. Set f icons should follow on from standard naming practices. Mixed-colour crossing icons should be named with the standard-colour line taking precedence over the other colour. Also, although the original intent was for set f to represent footpaths and trails, there are far more diagrams now where it is used to represent a system's Green Line, so the long dissertation above of "what crosses what" is irrelevant. AlgaeGraphix (talk) 22:24, 15 July 2021 (UTC)

@AlgaeGraphix

•  (BUE),  (BUE-sv) and  (BUE-us) were never dissented from my side

• Tuvalkin has expressed his dissent with -de suffixed localized variants and having worked through the cases laid out above, it is possible to see why.

• You or neither I cannot simply waive the original intent for set f to represent footpaths and trails at this point. Your claim of transit line outweighing footpath usage seems arbitrary and the amount of diagrams using these as trail icons is substantial even if that claim were correct.

• It is this polymorphism of symbol usage that renders -de suffixed name variants an inferior or secondary solution, because the prime reason for the cross-buck to rotate 90° exists in the duality of (trail / transit line) usage. And once we've dealt with that (see localization-independent gallery above), -de variants become just a vice-versa redundancy.

• The above has relevance as long as set f icons are used in dual context. The majority of icons from this set can be used interchangeably in both scenarios without further ado. The discussion did not deal with a general problem, but a specific one that arises for a small subset of icons in set f. And for this subset only, "should follow standard naming practices" was/is too vague, as the practices are

• set f is a colour variant of the standard set
• set f icons represent footpath/trails or a green transit rail line
• single-lettered, space separated color specs in suffix can be written as prefix notation, usually coding the same icon

• If you (hypothetically) wipe footpath usage out of the equation, you would neither combine  (lBUEq) nor  (lBUE) with  (fmKRZ). But this is a thing of the past and the de facto standard is set f used polymorphous, with these combinations actively used. Thus the need to deal with some special cases instead of denying they exist.

Another example exhibiting the localization-unspecific issues

• Given  (fSTR) combined with  (lBUEq) for the footpath instance and combined with  (lBUE) for the transit line, two distinct names are needed to refer to the results. Candidates are fSTR+lBUEq, fSTR+lBUE (long forms), and fBUE, BUE f (short forms). The first of the four potentially threatens new contributors by an unclear scope of q, cp. fSTRq+lBUEq.

• Normally, if a differentiation between footpath and green transit line use is not of relevance, prefix and suffix notation resolves to the same graphic, e. g. fSTR, STR f.
• fBUE preferring footpath use, and BUE f to code the set f color variant of  (BUE) deviate in the sense that they resolve to different graphics to accomodate for a conflict inherent to the standard naming practices, but exhibiting itself only for a small subset of set f icons.
• If we don't resort to this solution we cannot use either one of the short forms, as then both titles are ambiguous to the two variants. The example reiterates what was said in the framed #addendum box above.

--Cmuelle8 (talk) 08:54, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

File moves

Moved from User talk:Davey2010#BSicon file moves
Moved to Talk:BSicon/Renaming#File moves