Difference between revisions of "Narrative chart"

From Geohashing
imported>Relet
m (The chart)
imported>Relet
Line 4: Line 4:
  
 
You can find the latest versions of the chart here:
 
You can find the latest versions of the chart here:
* http://relet.net/data/657.tiled (Tiled map view. Recommended for viewing.)
+
* http://relet.net/data/657/ (Tiled map view. Recommended for viewing.)
 
* http://relet.net/data/657.svg (SVG Vector graphics. ~4MB. Recommended for download. Your browser might be able to render this.)
 
* http://relet.net/data/657.svg (SVG Vector graphics. ~4MB. Recommended for download. Your browser might be able to render this.)
 
* http://relet.net/data/657.png (PNG pre-rendered image. ~9MB. Recommended for download. Your browser might be able to render this.)
 
* http://relet.net/data/657.png (PNG pre-rendered image. ~9MB. Recommended for download. Your browser might be able to render this.)

Revision as of 07:05, 28 March 2012

The geohashing narrative chart idea sprung up on the day that xkcd #657 was published. It shows the history of geohashing expeditions (successful and not reached, as long as they have been attempted) throughout time and graticules.

The chart

You can find the latest versions of the chart here:

You may also find the code that generated the chart in the pygeohashing repository as meetupchart.py:

A (very small) part of the chart, highlighting the recent activity in the U.K.

Genesis and side-effecs

It took but a day for the first rendering to appear, and several days of fine-tuning to sort out the worst mistakes. In the meantime, relet and aperfectring realized that the same code that identifies participants in human-language expedition reports might be used by both the Aperfectbot and this chart, and threw their efforts together, creating the pygeohashing toolshed.

Bugs

There are several known, and many more unknown misclassifications of who participated, and who did not, in an expedition. Please notify relet or apr of any misclassified expedition, as they will use this information to improve on the fuzzy logic that performs the classification. The other viable option would be to include an explicit participant list in your expedition reports - but where would be the fun in that?

Please list any misclassified expedition on Talk:Narrative chart. Thank you! -- relet 11:57, 7 November 2009 (UTC)