Lars Aronsson skrev:
These are two recipies for how you can improve your language
version of Wikipedia in an evening. But we don't have any
cookbook to collect all such recipies, do we? Should we?
These two recipies have now been used for the Swedish Wikipedia
and we don't need to
On Tue, Feb 3, 2009 at 12:26 PM, Gerard Meijssen
gerard.meijs...@gmail.comwrote:
Hoi,
Have a look at this: http://www.omegawiki.org/Expression:Nederland This is
structured data It can be shown in multiple languages. It does allow for
interwiki links... It already works with MediaWiki ...
So
Gerard Meijssen hett schreven:
Hoi,
Have a look at this: http://www.omegawiki.org/Expression:Nederland This is
structured data It can be shown in multiple languages. It does allow for
interwiki links... It already works with MediaWiki ...
So the question is, why re-invent the wheel ?
Gerard Meijssen schreef:
Hoi,
Have a look at this: http://www.omegawiki.org/Expression:Nederland This is
structured data It can be shown in multiple languages. It does allow for
interwiki links... It already works with MediaWiki ...
So the question is, why re-invent the wheel ?
I think the
hmm ... my feeling is that it would be easier to adapt semantic wiki to
include language aliasing than adapt omega wiki to be less dictionary
centric in the context of a shared structured data site with _lossy_
defined community ontologies... But fundamentally there is no reason why
an
Michael Dale wrote:
We really need a wikidata type site.
A very easy and ugly workaround would be to store an image on
Wikimedia Commons, containting the letters Barack Obama and
having the filename President_of_USA.png. Next time change comes
to the White House, the image is replaced with
Hoi,
I really like Semantic MediaWiki. But horses for courses. SMW is great for
content where articles exist within one MediaWiki installation. It is TRULY
project based. OmegaWiki is data that is indeed a separate database. The
reason for a separate database is exactly because you do not want to
Lars Aronsson hett schreven:
What is the best way to organize infobox templates for geographic
places, the one used on the French, the Polish, or the Turkish
Wikipedia? What are the most important features in use on other
languages of Wikipedia, that my language is still missing?
Are
Step 1 would be making interwiki transclusion not suck.
Its been a long-standing back-burner project of mine.
-Chad
On Feb 2, 2009 8:05 PM, Marcus Buck w...@marcusbuck.org wrote:
Lars Aronsson hett schreven:
What is the best way to organize infobox templates for geographic
places, the one
