A leit motiv in the dependencies seems to be "this should be done by ImageMap", so that's another keyword.

Can you clarify what you mean by "this should be done by ImageMap"?

(In reply to comment #2)

Can you clarify what you mean by "this should be done by ImageMap"?

It's not me saying that; my suspicion is that it probably makes no sense and it's just an excuse. :) But I have no way to evalutate.

From https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikitech-l/2015-May/081713.html

Maybe VR is a gimmick, but VRML, or X3D as it is now called, could be
a useful way to present 3D diagrams embedded in pages. Like SVG, we
could use it with or without browser support.

This is pretty cool. There are some examples at http://examples.x3dom.org/ .

Simple example: a ball-joint pendulum: http://examples.x3dom.org/physics/ballJoint_pendulum.html
Complex example: a liver: http://liveranatomyexplorer.steven-birr.com/index.php?site=start

Should we close this? https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:Graph/Demo#Vega_2.0_Interactive_Examples is now live, supporting interactive Vega 2.0

To the subscribers -- would this task or a portion of it be a good fit for either of these programs?

No: a specific subtask should be identified. However, a motivated student with some knowledge of MediaWiki may be able to build and submit a personal proposal to address part of the matter. (Just don't flood this tracking task with such proposals, please; use subtasks.)

Progress: https://blog.wikimedia.org/2018/02/20/three-dimensional-models/

Proposing to decline this "tracking task" as it is extremely vague and does not fulfil any purpose nowadays apart from categorizing for the sake of categorization. There are more focused tasks / tags plus many project tags.

Counter propose that this issue be turned into (or identified with) a project. We need to be considering the methods for producing diagrams as a whole, not as separate incompatible silos.

@JamesCrook: What would be the scope / specific use cases of a new project? Asking as stuff like MediaWiki-extensions-Graph (or EasyTimeline) exists...

@Aklapper Scope: https://strategy.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Proposals_for_graphics-related_features i.e. an umbrella project about improving all aspects of tech for diagram making across Wikipedia. Infographics, animation and interaction are way behind what they could be.

Specific use cases I care about are (1) bioinformatics - the page for Citirc Acid should have a customised view of the overview image from Citric Acid Cycle. More generally chemical pathways are like a metro map. Updating and refining views of that map for different pathways should be easier than now. (2) how algorithms work - many algorithms are visual. In Wikipedia the visual presentations of sorting algorithms, for example, are 'all over the place' making comparison of the algorithms and what the algorithms are doing much less clear.

Infographics have very wide scope. They meld editable data with hand crafted presentation. The two use cases I picked from 'opportunities for improved diagram tech' might appear to be separate. We do better to treat them together under the auspices of a diagram-tech project. The same issues come up around creating diagrams in apparently different use cases.