On Mon, Sep 5, 2011 at 5:04 PM, Risker <risker...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 5 September 2011 11:02, Marc A. Pelletier <m...@uberbox.org> wrote: > > > On 05/09/2011 10:55 AM, Andrew Gray wrote: > > > As to why no-one is distributing a "filtered" version of Wikipedia, I > > > think that falls more under the general heading of "where are the > > > major third-party reusers that anyone actually cares about?" - the > > > non-existence of a commercial filtered version is less of a surprise > > > when we consider the dearth of commercial packaged versions at all... > > > > You'd think a "safe" version would be a valuable service that many would > > be willing to pay for, given the hordes of people beating down our doors > > demanding just that... > > > > oh, wait. > > > > > > They already exist, and have for years. We call them "mirrors. >
Yes, but most mirrors are just that - mirrors. As far as I know, there is no Wikipedia mirror that actually contains extra functionality - like improved searching, wisiwyg editing, automatic translation, image filtering, or whatever else one could think of. -- André Engels, andreeng...@gmail.com _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
