Hi Nuria and others,
For context: Stas and I are points of contact in the WMF for Markus et
al.'s project. That's why I'm commenting here. :)
* The project and its goals at the proposal level are described at
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Research:Understanding_Wikidata_Queries .
* As Markus
mmm...There are several things here that are already taken care of by our
user agent policy, for example: if you are using a bot or automated tool we
already ask you to please include bot in the user agent plus contact info.
Please see:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User-Agent_policy
Now, we
Hi again,
The solutions discussed here seem to be quite a bit more general than
what I was thinking about. Of course it would be nice to have a uniform,
cross-client way to indicate tools in any MW Web service or API, but
this is a slightly bigger (and probably more long-term) goal than what
On Mon, Oct 3, 2016 at 11:55 AM, Magnus Manske
wrote:
> Using custom HTTP headers would, of course, complicate calls for the tool
> authors (i.e., myself). $.ajax instead of $.get and all that. I would be
> less inclined to change to that.
Yes, the limitation of HTTP
Using custom HTTP headers would, of course, complicate calls for the tool
authors (i.e., myself). $.ajax instead of $.get and all that. I would be
less inclined to change to that.
On Mon, Oct 3, 2016 at 10:42 AM Guillaume Lederrey
wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 3, 2016 at 12:40
On Mon, Oct 3, 2016 at 12:40 AM, Stas Malyshev wrote:
> Hi!
>
>> This thread is missing some background context info as to what the
>> issues are, if you could forward it it will be great.
>
> Well, I'm not talking about specific issues, except for the general need
> of
Hi!
> This thread is missing some background context info as to what the
> issues are, if you could forward it it will be great.
Well, I'm not talking about specific issues, except for the general need
of identifying which tool is responsible for which queries. Basically,
there are several
Yuri/Stas:
This thread is missing some background context info as to what the issues
are, if you could forward it it will be great.
>Thanks, though using distinct User-Agent may be easier for analysis,
>since those are stored as separate fields, and doing operations on
>separate field would be