RobLa-WMF added a comment.
We discussed this in https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/E171 today. Full notes are https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/E171#2016 The summary: > - question discussed: which backends should InterwikiLookup support? (robla, 21:10:54) > - i imagine every wiki would read three files actually (and perform a deep merge): one with info shared across the family, one with info shared accross the laanguage, and one with local overrides for the specific wiki (DanielK_WMDE, 21:22:54) > - aude: also can interwiki ids be renamed? daniel: you can add prefixes. (DanielK_WMDE, 21:23:42) > - an entry can have multiple global ids. they act as aliases. only one of them would be used as a key in the file, makign it the *canonical* global id. (DanielK_WMDE, 21:24:05) > - <aude> another thing we should have is configuration for sorting order of interwiki ids (maintained in a sane place) (DanielK_WMDE, 21:33:00) > - LINK: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/MediaWiki:Interwiki_config-sorting_order-native-languagename (aude, 21:33:23) > - LINK: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/MediaWiki:Interwiki_config-sorting_order-native-languagename-firstword (aude, 21:33:26) > - <TimStarling> anyway, yes, the JSON format you propose looks very extensible and will presumably meet our needs (DanielK_WMDE, 21:33:39) > - LINK: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/MediaWiki:Interwiki_config-sorting_order-native-languagename-firstword (DanielK_WMDE, 21:34:21) > - <TimStarling> I don't want to have m:Interwiki_map anymore (DanielK_WMDE, 21:36:27) > - Tim is not convinced that interwiki info should be maintained by hand as json. Perhaps we still want dumpInterwiki (or equivaloent) (DanielK_WMDE, 21:50:15) > - Tim thinks we need to figure out what information can be taken from wgConf, and what should come from elsewhere, and how to maintain it. But it's not a blocker for now, we can figure iot out later (DanielK_WMDE, 21:53:55) > - next week's meeting: https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/E184 RFC: Requirements for change propagation (https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T102476) (robla, 21:57:21) > - Tim thinks it's ok to go ahead with implementing the proposed next steps, as they are non-threatening. But should we have a formal last call? (DanielK_WMDE, 22:02:40) We agreed that there's no reason to go to last call, because we weren't making a final decision. TASK DETAIL https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T113034 EMAIL PREFERENCES https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/settings/panel/emailpreferences/ To: daniel, RobLa-WMF Cc: Liuxinyu970226, MarcoAurelio, RobLa-WMF, gerritbot, Quiddity, Bene, hoo, zhuyifei1999, jayvdb, Spage, Isarra, Smalyshev, Ltrlg, GWicke, Purodha, Ricordisamoa, MZMcBride, Krenair, MrStradivarius, Legoktm, TTO, Anomie, ori, aaron, Aklapper, daniel, Lewizho99, Maathavan, D3r1ck01, Izno, Luke081515, Wikidata-bugs, aude, fbstj, Mbch331, Jay8g, bd808 _______________________________________________ Wikidata-bugs mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-bugs
