On Tue, Mar 27, 2012 at 05:58:39PM +0100, Kake wrote:

I've just run a script to import some OxPoints data into the Oxford Guide (thanks go to Janet for providing the data in handy CSV form). This covers all the colleges in OxPoints, which I believe is all the colleges which form part of the university.

In some cases, the data import simply added a few bits of missing data, e.g. geodata, summary, Wikipedia link, etc. In others, we didn't yet have a page for that college, so it created a stub one.

This sounds very cool. Could you put the script somewhere for possible reuse/adaptation? Maybe in https://urchin.earth.li/svn/openguides/utils/.

Cheers, Dominic.

On Tue 27 Mar 2012, Kake kake@earth.li wrote:

I've just run a script to import some OxPoints data into the Oxford Guide (thanks go to Janet for providing the data in handy CSV form). This covers all the colleges in OxPoints, which I believe is all the colleges which form part of the university.

The question of what forms "part of the university" is an interesting one (and one that gets argued about quite a lot!)...

"""Thirty-eight Colleges, though independent and self-governing, form a core element of the University, to which they are related in a federal system, not unlike the United States.

Each college is granted a charter approved by the Privy Council, under which it is governed by a Head of House and a Governing Body comprising of a number of Fellows, most of whom also hold University posts.

There are also six Permanent Private Halls, which were founded by different Christian denominations, and still retain their religious character today.

Thirty colleges and all six halls admit students for both undergraduate and graduate degrees. Six other colleges are for graduates only. In addition, All Souls College has Fellows only and Kellogg College supports the lifelong learning work of the University for adult, part-time, and professional development students."""

(From http://www.ox.ac.uk/about_the_university/introducing_oxford/the_structure_of...)

Not that that answers the question really. Do you want to include PPHs, though? (I can get their info too if necessary.)

In some cases, the data import simply added a few bits of missing data, e.g. geodata, summary, Wikipedia link, etc.

I wonder if we could get the photos from Wikipedia as well? Or would that be silly?

I copied the existing practice of adding the following categories to each: Colleges, Education, The University. I also added locales in the cases where the name of the road the college is on was already defined as a locale in the guide. I didn't add locales such as "Central" because I'm not sure what counts as central.

No, the more I look at "Central" the more I'm not really sure how useful it is. :-} Is it worth trying to come up with a definition of it? Or would we be better ditching it altogether?

Jx

On Wed 04 Apr 2012, Kake kake@earth.li wrote:

On Wed 28 Mar 2012, Janet McKnight janetmck@chiark.greenend.org.uk wrote:

...

Not that that answers the question really. Do you want to include PPHs, though? (I can get their info too if necessary.)

Up to you :) I have no strong opinion on the subject.

I'd say it depends if they're open to the (paying?) public. I would guess that they're not, & therefore are not really in scope.

I think I would prefer to have separate photos. We're not really adding anything to the data available on the internet by simply using the same photos as Wikipedia. I like the idea of multiple independent datasets.

OK, makes sense.

See other thread - if we can define the streets that lie within "Central", I think that would solve most of the problem.

OK, off the top of my head, opening bid for 'Central':

High Street Cornmarket Broad Street Turl Street George Street Gloucester Green St Giles New Inn Hall Street Queen Street St Aldates St Michael's Street Castle Street New Road Holywell Street Blue Boar Street Ship Street Covered Market / Golden Cross Magdalen Street (& East) Westgate Centre Clarendon Centre Pembroke Street

Any objections to any of those? This could be like a balloon debate but with streets! :)

I've probably missed some of the little ones that probably don't have much on them. I don't think the station is 'central' (it is possibly a locale of its own, though that may be covered by a search like 'things within 1 mile of the station').

Jx

On Thu 05 Apr 2012, Kake kake@earth.li wrote:

On Wed 04 Apr 2012, Janet McKnight janetmck@chiark.greenend.org.uk wrote:

...

OK, off the top of my head, opening bid for 'Central': [...]

All looks reasonable to me!

Goodgood. :)

...

I don't think the station is 'central' (it is possibly a locale of its own, though that may be covered by a search like 'things within 1 mile of the station').

I think the station could be a locale of its own. "Things within 1 mile of the station" doesn't necessarily coincide with "things you can get to from the station by walking a mile", due to the railway line

Good point! OK, a locale something like 'near station' then? (I don't want to use 'station' because I'd expect that to mean the shops which are actually in the station...) Of course anything in 'station' would also be in 'near station' (threads merge: 1 mile (from station)). :-)

(in fact I was pondering this after seeing the announcement for the next Oxford Geek Night - wondering how long it would take to get back to the station from there).

I'd allow at least 20 minutes, probably a bit more if the consequences of missing the train were awful (eg last train); but I don't walk very fast & I am a bit cautious about train times. It's probably do-able in 15 minutes if you walk briskly. There isn't a useful shortcut AFAIK... I mean, you can walk down the canal path, but it's probably no quicker & I don't think it would be much fun at night (not because of Scary People, just because of Dark Potholey Paths & Wet Overhanging Foliage).

Hope other people will provide estimated times too (& then you can take an average or something).

Jx

On Sun 08 Apr 2012, Kake kake@earth.li wrote:

The Cambridge Guide has "Station Area", which seems fairly clear - I have no strong opinion though.

That works for me. Will add it. :)

[Oxford Geek Night]

Thanks! I don't think I'll make the next one, but perhaps for the one after that we could go along and talk about the Oxford Guide? (I don't want to do the talking part but I can answer questions afterwards.)

I'm happy to do the talking if you're happy to do the thinking. :-} This is contingent on evenings getting a bit easier from a baby point of view, though (at the moment I don't think I'd be able to stay as late as the microslots).

Jx

On Sun 08 Apr 2012, Kake kake@earth.li wrote:

On Wed 28 Mar 2012, Janet McKnight janetmck@chiark.greenend.org.uk wrote:

...

Not that that answers the question really. Do you want to include PPHs, though? (I can get their info too if necessary.)

Just discovered this: http://oxford.openguides.org/wiki/?Permanent_Private_Hall

Ah, threads merge. :)

I am amused by the writeup on http://oxford.openguides.org/wiki/?Wycliffe_Hall

Wycliffe is the University's vicar factory... uhm, I mean Church of England seminary. It's run by Richard Turnbull, who's a God Bloke, and is full of mature students with distinctive haircuts who say everything in three points beginning with the letter "R". The vicar at Ebbes went there, and has the haircut to prove it.

(I managed to guess the author before I even looked at the revision history.)

Hahaha yes indeed! :-D It seems a shame to delete it, but if we're trying to be a bit more factual and/or less libellous, it should probably go...

Also, hm, if some PPHs already have entries, maybe they all should. But then why not all University departments etc... and that way madness lies (trust me). So hard to decide where a model of a bit of the world begins and ends!

Jx