Thanks for your suggestions. Just some quick pointers below.
h, 18/05/2014 08:26:
(I-A). Tabulate the data points in absolute numbers first, not
percentage numbers [...]
(I-B). Include all language versions for the *editing traffic* report as
well. [...]
(I-C). Provide static data objects in
Dear Nemo,
As I am waiting for a more complete response, I am not sure that I
understand your last No as in No, we definitely can't means. To
clarify, take the CLDR supplement Language-Territory information for
example
Could you give an example of what we could do better than CLDR or the
relevant ISO standards?
On 18 May 2014 10:06, h hant...@gmail.com wrote:
Dear Nemo,
As I am waiting for a more complete response, I am not sure that I
understand your last No as in No, we definitely can't means. To
h, 17/05/2014 01:54:
Thus, we might want to share what has been done
+1, but:
and what could be done
regarding the current traffic data provided by the Wikimedia Foundation
while acknowledging the sensitivity of the traffic data release,
what additional data would you need and why, given
Very useful Han-Teng, but one should note that the original data is about the
percentage of requesting ip addresses, excluding duplications of a single
IP address within the same day, and not for example the number of edits.
These two can be very different depending on dynamic/static IP address
