On Fri, Aug 21, 2009 at 5:52 AM, Joshua Gay<joshua...@gmail.com> wrote: > > I think it would be easy to build upon this work and one could do a really > powerful MW extension (and maybe some new templates, etc) that would allow > people to contribute to both MW and OL simultaneously. > > I think that the OL should continue to do what is trying to do. I also think > people should be able to quickly and easily create new and important > wikimedia projects, especially when people are passionate to do so. And, I > think when different projects on the Internet have a lot of overlap in what > they are trying to do, and share similar philosophy and ethics, that they > should have their machines play nice with each other and make sharing > (reading and writing) data between them easy. > > -Josh
I was gong to say basically this, and then Josh said it better :) There's no special reason to reinvent the wheel; as DGG mentioned there are several very difficult aspects of building a big bibliographic database (cataloging standards, getting the data in the first place, theoretical relationships between works) that the OL folks have tackled with some success; and there is value in having a project that focuses just on this hard problem. SJ is right that Wikimedian expertise lies in making large wikis functional and multilingual, and augmenting data; but that doesn't mean such a project has to be a *Wikimedia* project. I think cooperation between the projects would be better. Interlinking into Wikip/media would raise OL's profile substantially, and would mean that WP had access to some sort of canonical catalog data; a win for everyone. -- Phoebe _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
