Robert Rohde wrote:
> True, though under the current system a middle man in position of a
> user authentication token could do exactly the same things to
> Wikimedia as someone with the plaintext password. Which is a short
> way of saying our system has never been built with much security in
> min
On Thu, Feb 19, 2009 at 2:52 PM, Robert Rohde wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 19, 2009 at 11:04 AM, Thomas Dalton
> wrote:
> > 2009/2/19 Nathan :
> >> So the question really should be, what of this would be to our
> disadvantage?
> >
> > It's very difficult to set up technically, for a start. Live mirrorin
On Thu, Feb 19, 2009 at 12:30 PM, Thomas Dalton wrote:
> 2009/2/19 Robert Rohde :
>> I think you are significantly overestimating the difficulty. We
>> already have an API [1] and similar tools that allow one to accomplish
>> many similar tasks. For example, calling ?action=render will give you
2009/2/19 Robert Rohde :
> I think you are significantly overestimating the difficulty. We
> already have an API [1] and similar tools that allow one to accomplish
> many similar tasks. For example, calling ?action=render will give you
> a llive HTML version of any current page that could be wrap
On Thu, Feb 19, 2009 at 11:04 AM, Thomas Dalton wrote:
> 2009/2/19 Nathan :
>> So the question really should be, what of this would be to our disadvantage?
>
> It's very difficult to set up technically, for a start. Live mirroring
> of existing content isn't too hard, but sorting out editing would
and make it editable.
>> Imagine
>> > > > sections of the wiki, right where the experts are aggregated.
>> > > Space.com
>> > > > hosting a concurrent version of the astronomy section. Technology
>> at
>> > > > slashdot.org. L
com... you get the drift.
>> >
>> > You guys consider this. In the mean time I'll build up my site and my
>> user
>> > base. If there is a way to integrate in the future, I'll do that. I'm
>> > going to shoot for using openID, so this is just another re
2009/2/19 Nathan :
> So the question really should be, what of this would be to our disadvantage?
It's very difficult to set up technically, for a start. Live mirroring
of existing content isn't too hard, but sorting out editing would be a
nightmare. We presumably wouldn't want everyone editing un
On Thu, Feb 19, 2009 at 1:30 PM, David Levy wrote:
>
>
> But what's the point of duplicating the entire structure (including
> talk pages) instead of simply referring these experts to Wikipedia?
> Even if everything could be made seamless, what would be the
> advantage?
>
It's simple, really. Fi
Nathan wrote:
> This sounds like a very interesting idea to me. None of the potential
> problems are obvious dealbreakers to me. It isn't outsourcing, the talkpage
> can be shared as easily as anything else, we would really like to take
> advantage of concentrated groups of expert users, and the m
Gerard Meijssen wrote:
> If articles can be shared, surely talk pages can be shared too ?
Yes, but this eliminates the avoidance of interaction that David
Goodman cited as a benefit.
And if that's the case, what *is* the benefit? Why dedicate effort
and resources toward duplicating the normal e
This sounds like a very interesting idea to me. None of the potential
problems are obvious dealbreakers to me. It isn't outsourcing, the talkpage
can be shared as easily as anything else, we would really like to take
advantage of concentrated groups of expert users, and the more editors we
get (whe
Hoi,
If articles can be shared, surely talk pages can be shared too ?
Thanks,
GerardM
2009/2/19 David Levy
> David Goodman wrote:
>
> > The benefit is in getting users who would not be comfortable on
> > Wikipedia because of the perceived and real behavior problems on that
> > site--even i
2009/2/19 David Levy :
> David Goodman wrote:
>
>> The benefit is in getting users who would not be comfortable on
>> Wikipedia because of the perceived and real behavior problems on that
>> site--even if this is no worse ultimately than in the academic world,
>> the mode of interaction is certainl
David Goodman wrote:
> The benefit is in getting users who would not be comfortable on
> Wikipedia because of the perceived and real behavior problems on that
> site--even if this is no worse ultimately than in the academic world,
> the mode of interaction is certainly very different.
In other wo
The benefit is in getting users who would not be comfortable on
Wikipedia because of the perceived and real behavior problems on that
site--even if this is no worse ultimately than in the academic world,
the mode of interaction is certainly very different. Why do we assume
the present editing envir
2009/2/19 Gerard Meijssen :
> Hoi,
> Thomas OTHER people can see this benefit.. It is not that hard.. even I can.
Then would you care to explain it to me?
___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedi
On Thu, Feb 19, 2009 at 8:51 AM, Chad wrote:
>
> That aside: the two situations are entirely different. This proposal
> is effectively outsourcing a section of Wikipedia to some experts
> in the field. That's entirely unlike the Foundation deciding to add
> an additional language for Wikipedia to
> > hosting a concurrent version of the astronomy section. Technology
> at
> > > > slashdot.org. Law at nolo.com... you get the drift.
> > > >
> > > > You guys consider this. In the mean time I'll build up my site and
> my
> > > user
>
On Thu, Feb 19, 2009 at 12:47 PM, basedrop wrote:
> I don't have a particular need to have the art history portion of the wiki
> editable for my users at my domain. I have the specialized users at my
> site, I'd like to take advantage of that aggregation of specialized users
> to the benefit of
hdot.org. Law at nolo.com... you get the drift.
> > >
> > > You guys consider this. In the mean time I'll build up my site and my
> > user
> > > base. If there is a way to integrate in the future, I'll do that.
> I'm
> > > going
d up my site and my
> user
> > base. If there is a way to integrate in the future, I'll do that. I'm
> > going to shoot for using openID, so this is just another reason for you
> guys
> > to consider the use of openID as well.
> >
> > Michael
>
Hoi,
Thomas OTHER people can see this benefit.. It is not that hard.. even I can.
Thanks,
GerardM
2009/2/19 Thomas Dalton
> 2009/2/19 Robert Rohde :
> > Do other people agree that supporting live mirrors, if it could be
> > done in a practical manner, would be a natural extension of the
>
2009/2/19 Robert Rohde :
> Do other people agree that supporting live mirrors, if it could be
> done in a practical manner, would be a natural extension of the
> Foundation's free content goals?
No, because I can't see the benefit over a hyperlink.
___
I find the suggestion in this discussion fascinating.
Suppose we did allow fully functional wikipages to be loaded from WMF
servers and embedded in external sites in roughly the same way that
something like Google Maps can be embedded in third party sites.
I can see some practical problems (e.g.
2009/2/19 basedrop :
> Hello Thomas and thanks for your response.
>
> I would point out that the foundation created a French version, hosted it
> on French servers, in the French language because they saw the benefit of
> delivering something to a specific constituency.
Delivering something to a
for using openID, so this is just another reason for you guys
> to consider the use of openID as well.
>
> Michael
>
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: foundation-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org
> [mailto:foundation-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of Thoma
as Dalton
Sent: Wednesday, February 18, 2009 3:57 PM
To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List
Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] mirroring a portion of the wikipedia
2009/2/18 basedrop :
>
> Hello,
> I'm not sure if this is the place to pose this question, if not could you
> respond with t
2009/2/18 basedrop :
>
> Hello,
> I'm not sure if this is the place to pose this question, if not could you
> respond with the proper place.
>
> I'm building out a social networking site centered around an "art" and
> "arthistory" theme. I would like to display a real time dynamic version of
> t
On Wed, Feb 18, 2009 at 6:36 PM, basedrop wrote:
>
> Hello,
> I'm not sure if this is the place to pose this question, if not could you
> respond with the proper place.
>
You'd probably get better replies on wikitech-l, but you're here already.
>
> I'm building out a social networking site c
Hoi,
This is indeed an interesting question.. I hope that there are ways to
accommodate you.
Thanks,
GerardM
2009/2/19 basedrop
>
> Hello,
> I'm not sure if this is the place to pose this question, if not could you
> respond with the proper place.
>
> I'm building out a social networkin
Hello,
I'm not sure if this is the place to pose this question, if not could you
respond with the proper place.
I'm building out a social networking site centered around an "art" and
"arthistory" theme. I would like to display a real time dynamic version of
the arthistory section of the wiki
32 matches
Mail list logo
