« First bit of press??? |
Main
|
warchalking.org »
more is more?
James Docherty sends this:
"Attached is a quick diagram which having just looked at the site is now very obsolete as its too complicated - definitely would advocate a 'Less is more' approach! However, I'm still concerned that by not having any alpha-numerics it may be too reliant on accurate reproduction which given the speed/surface might be tricky. The attachment is the full info - 80% of which is optional so could look very similar to the 'kynance' original."
I think it's a little too complicated to be honest - asking someone to orient themself to understand direction of signal strength might be a bridge too far. Although the pseudo-encryption of the SSID is fun. What do you think?
Posted by matt at June 26, 2002 04:24 PM
Comments
Are the bandwidth and contact info necessary on the Chalk'd Symbol? They seem trivial if you're just looking for access, eh?
What units are the distance in? Is that even necessary if the node is chalk'd properly? Chalk'ing a node 50 meters or feet away from the actual node is defeating the purpose of chalk'ing it, right?
I think its a great template though. The SSID 'encryption' is a nice touch, too.
Posted by Justin at June 26, 2002 04:56 PM
As with Matt, I'm not a wireless expert so don't know how far nodes need to be...I don't think that really matters since the numbers can be anything (2, 5, 1 whatever). If distance isn't a useful piece of info then it just gets omitted. The same goes for the contact info but I thought that an extensible structure that allows people to add as much/little info as they like would be the way to go. For example a 'T' within the right hand C could denonte a temporary node as discussed yesterday.
WRT orienting oneself to the chalk in order to know which direction the node is, I don't really see this as too complicated since its just using the assumption that you are looking directly at the chalk (from a position perpendicular to its surface) as the datum. Surely this is exactly the same as the windroses idea? (or am I missing something?).
I thought the 'encryption' was quite a nice touch since anyone walking down the street and seeing chalk with their company name on it (I'm assuming that's what lots of SSID's are?) might be more curious than seeing a few 'random' letters and squiggles.
Glad the ideas are flowing freely...we should be at v1 by the end of the week!
Posted by James at June 26, 2002 05:23 PM
Although this model is a bit too complicated, I think that it would be worthwhile having a way to communicate what network type is in use (e.g. 802.11b as opposed to 802.11a or proprietary protocols).
Posted by rakslice at June 26, 2002 06:56 PM
Too complicated by half. We're talking about something as simple as a big 'X' to mark the spot. It's like a pointer to a geocache, except that the cache is 'connectivity', which gives you access to all the chewy stuff.
Posted by Nick at June 27, 2002 12:56 AM
This SSID pseudo-encryption may be hard to understand to people who are not very familiar with computers.
Bandwith does indeed not matter when searching just for connection, also direction and distance - the may vary, using different hardware and how to measure them?
And chalking ICQ, MSN, AOL, IRC, whatewer numbers/id's is unnecessary self-promotion, when we need only information about wireless access.
And being also a bit positive - maybe add date of last revision to the mark? Like "29 Jun 2002" or "2002-06-29".
Posted by J-Georg at June 28, 2002 12:34 PM
hi
o thing it isnīt a good idea to put the SSID into the icons, what do you thing IT peoples thing if they see there SSID on the building?
BTW we need a simbol for VPN encripted networks, e.g. a cycle with a V in it.
cu Florian, germany
Posted by Florian at June 28, 2002 10:26 PM
- - - - -
http://www2.bc.edu/~benedicw/_misc/warchalking.gif
This is a quick mock up of how I think this whole symbol thing should go down. Simplicity is so so key. Three symbols should be the max. Alpha numerics should have a preferred location, but should be kept optional by all means (along with direction). SSID along the bottom (looks better, makes sense), with maybe the WEP code across the top (where known/applicable). If you want bandwidth on the right and a/b/g on the left, sure, but all of these things are super secondary. The important thing is the IDENTIFICATION OF THE LOCATION. They're just an extension of the Original Three, but (if I don't say so myself) clearer, more unique, and too pretty :) . This whole idea will fly--but I want it to look nice and clean, too.
If the data can be easily put by the symbol, well great. If the only surface is a stone wall face of a coffee shop, best stick with the nice looking simple symbol and the rest can be gleaned with software, or friggin walking inside and asking the story. Direction can be as simple as nothing (you are * here), a clock-compass (noon = forward, 6 = backwards, 3 = right), or a simple map (through the door, down the hall, passed the restroom, door on your right with circular window).
The original symbols are a bit too simple. A circle on a wall is way too ambiguous, as is (though less so) the open butterfly-circle. Combine the two, and it takes on the qualities of a true rune (not that all runs are encased in circles, but that they are obviously intentional and meaningful shapes). The W was always no good. Also, the way these are drawn, the status of the node could be easily updated by erasing or adding a simple line here or there. They're also symbols I wouldn't mind making a cool sign out of and posting in front of my coffee shop or library or whatever...easily transferable to other mediums, but also good-looking (again, if I don't say so myself ;) .
This is the last time I'll post this...I jsut wanted to make sure all bases were covered...sorry...
Posted by Tremelune at June 30, 2002 05:28 AM
Post a comment
