On Fri, Nov 22, 2013 at 4:31 PM, Karen Coyle <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > On 11/22/13 1:58 AM, Ben Companjen wrote: > > Having links to Wikipedia instead of copying descriptions from > > Wikipedia could help clear up one licencing issue, that of CC-BY-SA > > content in what we/some of us would like to be CC0. Mashups (or > > GreaseMonkey scripts) could retrieve the Wikipedia abstract on the fly > > (then you'd always have the latest version too). Maybe some caching > > could be allowed to save bandwith. > > > > Ben, I think the copying is fine, but I thought that there was a "from > Wikipedia" statement, which, however, I do not see. Of course, since > anyone can edit... it would have to be non-editable. BBC does this, with > a link back to Wikipedia so you can edit it there. The cc-by-sa does > allow copying, it just asks for attribution. For what it's worth, that was also our choice in MusicBrainz: store links, and show Wikipedia extracts with a "read more" link (we cache them for a while IIRC though, not always re-request them). It sometimes gives meh results when Wikipedia articles don't have a good abstract, but then that's something people can go and fix :) Also FWIW, our likely plan for the future is to move towards storing Wikidata IDs rather than Wikipedia links directly, since those join together every Wikipedia's page for the artist, album or whatever (authors and works for you I guess?) and make it easier to display the right language depending on interface language if you translate the site. Cheers, Nicolás
_______________________________________________ Ol-discuss mailing list - [email protected] http://mail.archive.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ol-discuss Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ To unsubscribe from this mailing list, send email to [email protected]
