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. registration, server load), but assumming the practical issues could be overcome, I think philosophically this is actually in line with the free content goals of the Foundation. Obviously we already allow our content to be copied and used far and wide, so allowing others to host the content would not be unusual. It is simply a matter of whether live content is achievable rather than static versions. Provided the server load problem could be managed in a reasonable way, I don't see any reason we shouldn't want site owners to display the most up-to-date content available. And once you have live content, there is no particular reason not to include edit links (either locally live or as a link back into wikipedia.org). 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? -Robert Rohde _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
