Differences between revisions 22 and 23
← Revision 22 as of 2012-03-09 10:28:06 →
Size: 2906
Editor: DanRasmussen
Comment: Removed link causing redirect
← Revision 23 as of 2012-03-10 11:57:21 →
Size: 0
Editor: JasonMcArthur
Comment: old
Deletions are marked like this. Additions are marked like this.
Line 1: Line 1:
This page is for discussion of maintaining the node maps at:

 http://map.personaltelco.net/.

= People: =

=== Software Maintenance ===

 * MattHickey
 * EliabHelon
 * DonPark

=== Database Maintenance ===

 * BillHolmstrom can help sometimes
 * PatCallahan can help too
 * Others <-- You can volunteer here!

=== Field Verification ===
 
 * Let's go driving

= Issues: =

=== Node Naming/Taxonomy ===
(See NodeNaming)
----
I think we need to figure out a systematic way to name our nodes. I feel that NYC Wireless has done a good job with this, with the nodes listed by borough. --BillHolmstrom
----
I agree, oddly enough, I did this sometime yesterday for my Ashland nodes and was thinking the exact same thing. --ForrestEnglish
----
Since the node map database already has a field for group affiliation (PTP, NYC, BAWUG, etc), and groups are generally local/regional in scope, each group should determine how to list locations within their "territory." In New York, they categorize by borough first, then generally by street location. For Portland, I suggest using N, NE, NW, SW, SE for the closer-in areas, and community names (Vancouver, Gresham, etc.) for outer areas. After that, areas with thin node populations can list the node name, while thickly populated areas may need sub-areas before the node name. I believe we should avoid using street addresses in the node name. Examples:
 * SW: Downtown: Pioneer Courthouse Square
 * SE: Inner: Lucky Lab
 * NW: Old Town: Union Station
 * Vancouver: Esther Short Park
--BillHolmstrom

 That sounds good to me Bill, you want to lead by example? ;) --AdamShand

  I'm ready to get a start on it if there's a consensus it is the way to go... although I suppose it is easily changed later. --BillHolmstrom

   I think someone just needs to make an executive decision, and yours is as good as mine. :-) So go for it. -- Adam.
----
 I like the idea of two different views, an overall view, and a regional view. For the overall view I think something like this would be good..

  Country : State : City : Region (Group)

 So for my node something like this:

  USA : OR : Portland : SE (Personal Telco)

 And then when you get a listing of just the Personal Telco Nodes (or maybe it should be just per city/region instead of per node?):

  Personal Telco : 97202 : 35?? SE Milwaukie Ave (adam@personaltelco.net)

 Hrm, on reviewing I'm not sure how much sense that actually makes. What might be nice though is if each of the stanza's (eg. country) could be clicked on for a complete listing of that area. If we standardize on region names then we could even do maps of regions which would be useful to download before leaving on a trip (to store for when you don't have net access). Thoughts? -- AdamShand

=== Other Issues ===

----
[CategoryCommunity]
[CategoryPersonalTelco]

MapMaintenance (last edited 2012-03-09 10:28:06 by DanRasmussen)