But... We have managed to put maps into Wikivoyage that are interactive https://en.wikivoyage.org/wiki/Cranbrook They even have third party overlays for topography and other features.
We at Wiki Project Med have added OWID interactive graphs to a mediawiki install of which thousands of visualizations are available https://mdwiki.org/wiki/WikiProjectMed:OWID#How_to_use And we did the latter with a few thousand in funding and a bunch of volunteer time. We need the will to do this and it could happen. James On Sat, Feb 24, 2024 at 10:41 PM Gnangarra <gnanga...@gmail.com> wrote: > Thats a fair question, but its not a simple answer, nor something that can > be properly assessed on short notice. I think one of the first issues I > see is that the underlying mediawiki coding would need to be completely > overhauled to enable full interactive architecture. That it would need to > be done in a way that enable ease of interaction for all contributors so > that we dont lose a large portion of our existing community which itself is > already struggling to maintain currently levels. The next issue is > bringing 25 years of accumulated content across to the new architecture > while keeping all the history of that in place. > > I'd be more concerned if the WMF stumped up with a figure this quickly if > they even understood the question even though its our whole foundation. > There has never been any big picture architectural planning even the > creation of WikiData infrastructure wasnt as big as this will need to be. > I know Marshall has just started asking questions about what people are > envisioning the future to look like, I'd expect that the Hackathon and > Wikimania will be where we start hearing more about what the future can > look like and the steps that will need to take place to achieve that. > > Galder please keep on asking these questions, I suspect a lot of what we > want is already being done by many different sites in a multitude of ways. > We just need to identify our own needs and make sure that each step can be > achieved without the negative impact that so many past changes have had. > This will take a multi year commitment in both funding and support from the > WMF and the Community the later of which is a lot harder to establish. > > On Fri, 23 Feb 2024 at 21:58, Galder Gonzalez Larrañaga < > galder...@hotmail.com> wrote: > >> Two weeks have passed since we last heard about the WMF explaining why >> they renounce to add interactive content and infrastructure, and the >> question remains unanswered: how much would it cost this so it can't be >> done? >> >> I really hope to have an answer, as we could know if what it is needed is >> totally out of scope, or is something that could be payed for. >> >> Thanks >> >> Galder >> ------------------------------ >> *From:* Galder Gonzalez Larrañaga <galder...@hotmail.com> >> *Sent:* Wednesday, February 7, 2024 9:09 AM >> *To:* Wikimedia Mailing List <wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org> >> *Subject:* Re: [Wikimedia-l] Re: We need more interactive content: we >> are doing it wrong >> >> Thanks Marshall for your pointing out an official answer from the WMF, >> Let me say that this is not only disappointing, you are also presenting a >> false dichotomy where we can only "save a kitten" OR "plant a tree", while >> we have budget, staff and enough talented volunteers to do both. The >> dichotomy is presented in a way that makes us think that an estimation of >> the cost of solving this problem has been done and it is out of all the >> possibilities, but we don't know what the estimation is. Is there an >> estimation of how much would this cost? If so, could you please share it so >> we know why this is out of our possibilities? >> >> I say that this dichotomy is false and I will try to explain why: >> >> - When Maryana Iskander assumed her CEO role, she pointed that the >> way the annual plan is done should be changed, because the previous >> monolithic assumption that only things reflected in the annual plan can be >> done (and nothing else) was preventing us from going forward. You can read >> it the full reflection here: >> >> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_Chief_Executive_Officer/Maryana%E2%80%99s_Listening_Tour/My_Incoming_Priorities. >> Claiming that a high priority problem can't be solved now because it >> wasn't >> planned one year ago is not the way it was supposed this to be done. >> - The message is not about the Graphs extension. It has some weight >> there, but reading this message about interactive content in terms of "if >> we solve the graphs issue, our job here is done" is also a wrong >> reduction. >> But let's think that, indeed, this was the only problem we should solve. >> Arguing that it is not in the Annual plan so it can't be solved is a >> fallacy, as explained above, but even then, the annual plan was done AFTER >> the graph extension was broken. Waiting two years for a high importance >> problem to be solved can't be the way to do things. >> - Two weeks after Iskander's message, Yael Weissburg wrote in Diff >> this post: >> >> https://diff.wikimedia.org/2022/01/28/what-does-the-world-need-from-us-now-external-trends-to-watch/ >> >> <https://diff.wikimedia.org/2022/01/28/what-does-the-world-need-from-us-now-external-trends-to-watch/>. >> In this post Weissburg wrote about "trends that we should expect to >> accelerate in the years to come because they relate to key changes in how >> people access, interact with, and share knowledge". You can read the post >> by yourself, but there is an important takeaway: people is searching for >> content in another way, and we should give them "rich content". Whatever >> it >> takes. >> - One year after Iskander assumed she wrote an update. There we can >> read that the number 2 priority is "Re-centering the Foundation's >> responsibility in supporting the technology needs of the Wikimedia >> movement >> by understanding the needs of our contributor communities, as well as >> emerging topics like machine learning/artificial intelligence and >> innovations for new audiences." We should be doing that "innovations for >> new audiences", but from you message it seems that we still need "a >> conversation to happen" >> >> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_Chief_Executive_Officer/Updates/Year_One_Update >> - Later that year, Selena Deckelmann wrote that "The Foundation needs >> to exhibit better accountability in maintaining essential services (e.g. >> 2-factor authentication), and to be explicit about the technical tasks >> that >> it is definitely leaving for volunteers to own." ( >> >> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_Executive_and_Leadership_teams/Chief_Product_and_Technology_Officer/Selena%27s_Listening_Tour). >> Yes, I understand that the example given is another one, but the idea is >> there: "the foundation needs to exhibit better accountability in >> maintaining essential services". The message follows with an elephant in >> the room, but we are not going to talk again about the elephant, for sure. >> - >> >> Finally, last two years annual plans were said to be rooted in the >> 2030 Strategy (which talks about this issue) and, more specifically, on >> the >> 2019 Medium Term plan. >> >> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_Medium-term_plan_2019. >> This Medium Term plan (which, again, is the one used as a roadmap) has >> only >> two high priority topics, the second one being: "2. Modernize our product >> experience. We will make contributor and reader experiences useful and >> joyful; moving from viewing Wikipedia as solely a website, to developing, >> supporting, and maintaining the Wikimedia ecosystem as a collection of >> knowledge, information, and insights with infinite possible product >> experiences and applications.". Then, there's a priority named "Platform >> evolution" which says literally this: "The Platform Evolution priority >> encompasses improving and modernizing Wikimedia’s technical ecosystem to >> respond to a landscape where Artificial Intelligence is creating content, >> rich media dominates learning, content is structured, and collaboration >> tools work across multiple devices and have minimal technical >> requirements. >> (...)Addressing content gaps also includes making it easier to incorporate >> rich media, which requires more storage and server power, and better >> tooling for editing, uploading, and incorporating more types of media. On >> the engineering front, better automation of the software release process >> through continuous integration, and a more intentional focus on code >> quality and testing will allow for more innovative and faster >> experimentation". Again, this is not something new that happened two >> months >> ago, this was written in 2019 coming for an extremely long conversation >> that already happened between 2017-2019 and that is the guiding principle >> of our current Annual Plan, stated by the authors of the annual plan. If >> we >> are not moving in the way we decided, we are doing it wrong. >> >> >> I could continue making a list of claims, but I think that is enough to >> understand that the conversation has happened, that we can save the kitten >> and plant the tree, that we already have decided that we need this and that >> it is already written in the annual plan. Claiming that there's no budget >> is also a bad move, because we don't know how much would this cost. In >> fact, knowing the cost would be the result of having a plan, but if there's >> no plan, we can't know if we can pay for it. >> >> Let me end pointing again the big issue here: if we don't go forward with >> our top importance strategic goals because they are too complex to be >> solved, then every year will be more difficult to get there. The only way >> to solve complex issues is to start doing them. Postponing them while we >> try to take the low hanging fruits is a bad move; claiming that we are not >> working on them ("one that we have not yet started given the other >> priorities we’ve been working on") because we have been solving other >> issues is the worst news we can have. >> >> Have a nice day >> >> Galder >> >> >> >> - >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> *From:* Butch Bustria <bustr...@gmail.com> >> *Sent:* Wednesday, February 7, 2024 5:19 AM >> *To:* Wikimedia Mailing List <wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org> >> *Subject:* [Wikimedia-l] Re: We need more interactive content: we are >> doing it wrong >> >> Hi Everyone, >> >> My earnest hope that the Wikimedia Foundation on its 2024-2025 Annual >> Financial Plan prioritize and I mean put first among all is the technical >> infrastructure among all its budgetary items. We can scale down budgets to >> 3rd party organizations like the Knowledge Equity Fund, Movement Strategy >> Governance funding, campaign grants, and other "wants" to accomodate a >> highly technically reliable and stable Wikimedia online projects ("needs"), >> future proof, and user friendly experience which require investments on >> quality manpower, hardware, applications and the like. We love open source >> but we also be pragmatic and wise on selection of choices because we want >> our content be conveniently available and reliable to our readers, users, >> consumers and also editors. >> >> A welcome development is the MediaWiki Users and Developers Conference, >> the successor to EMWCon. >> >> https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/MediaWiki_Users_and_Developers_Conference_2024 >> >> The said conference will be held in Portland, Oregon, from April 17–19, >> 2024. >> >> I also hope the Foundation invest in more technical gatherings, both >> onsite, hybrid or online to engage and reach out to more technical >> contributors, within and beyond the Wikimedia movement. I also hope WMF to >> start exploring eastward to Asia or elsewhere in the world as well fully >> diversify the technical community. >> >> >> >> Kind regards, >> >> *Butch Bustria* >> >> >> >> >> On Wed, Feb 7, 2024, 4:54 AM Brion Vibber <bvib...@wikimedia.org> wrote: >> >> Thanks for weighing in, Marshall! >> >> I agree wholeheartedly that we need to do a proper architecture for a >> sandbox for interactive media, that will be safe (first and foremost), >> perform well in the browser, work across device types (desktop web, mobile >> web, mobile apps), and maintain our key requirements on editability and >> reusability, balanced against the security and privacy needs of users if >> we're going to invest the effort. >> >> Backing up to do it right rather than patch up Graphs “one more time” is >> the right thing, and I’m very happy to see a confluence of interest around >> this now! >> >> My hope is we can figure out how to make that architecture & testing work >> happen in the near term until we collectively (inside WMF and out) can >> wrangle resources to make the implementation production-ready. >> >> Once we have a common infrastructure to build on, it’ll be easier for >> work to progress on individual types of media (graphs, charts, maps, >> animations, editable simulations, coding examples, etc, as well as classics >> like panorama viewers and integrating the audio/video player into a sandbox >> for heightened security). >> >> My biggest hope is that we’ll enable more work from outside WMF to happen >> – letting volunteers and other orgs who might have their own specialty >> areas and work funding to progress without every change being a potential >> new security risk. >> >> When we have succeeded in the past, we have succeeded by making tools >> that other people can use as their own basis to build their own works. I’m >> confident we can get there on interactive media with some common focus. >> >> Let's all try to capture some of this momentum while we've got it and set >> ourselves up for success down the road. >> >> – b >> >> >> On Tue, Feb 6, 2024, 12:27 PM <mmil...@wikimedia.org> wrote: >> >> Hi everyone – My name is Marshall Miller, I am a Senior Director of >> Product at the Wikimedia Foundation, and I work with many of the teams that >> are involved with the user experience of our websites and apps, such as the >> Editing, Web, Growth, and Mobile Apps teams (among others) [1]. I’m part of >> the leadership group that makes decisions about how the WMF teams approach >> things like graphs, interactive content, and video. Thank you all for >> having this in-depth and important discussion. >> >> I know that issues with graphs [2] are what started this discussion, but >> I agree that it makes sense to think about this in terms of the broader >> category of “interactive content”, because other kinds of interactive >> content, such as maps or timelines, would share architecture with what is >> needed for graphs (video is a different and more complicated content >> type). I wrote a lot in this email, but here are a couple of the main >> points up front: to support graphs and other interactive content, we would >> need to take a step back and make a substantial investment in sustainable >> architecture to do it – so that it works well, safely, and is built to >> last. And because that’s a substantial investment, we need to weigh it >> against other important investments in order to decide whether and when to >> do it. >> >> I know that it is very frustrating that the Graph extension has not been >> operational for many months – it means readers haven’t been seeing graphs >> in articles, and editors haven’t been able to use graphs to do things like >> monitor backlogs in WikiProjects. Over the months of trying to find a way >> to turn graphs back on, it has become clear that there isn’t a safe >> shortcut here and that the path forward will require a substantial >> investment – one that we have not yet started given the other priorities >> we’ve been working on. Every year we have to make difficult tradeoffs >> around what areas of our technical infrastructure we can and cannot take >> on. In the current fiscal year, the Product and Technology department has >> made experienced editors a priority [3], and many things that volunteers >> have asked for are either accomplished or in flight: >> >> Improvements to PageTriage (complete) [4] >> Watchlist in the iOS app (complete) [5] >> Patrolling in the Android app (in progress) [6] >> Dark mode (in progress) [7] >> Improvements to the Commons Upload Wizard (in progress) [8] >> …and other projects. >> >> But I know this conversation isn’t as much about what editors need as >> what current and future readers need. Between talking about interactive >> content and talking about video, it sounds like we’re having the larger >> conversation of what we should be offering today’s and tomorrow’s readers >> to help them learn from encyclopedic content – whether we need to be >> offering interactivity, or video, or perhaps enabling other platforms/apps >> to use our content to make interactive or video materials there. This is a >> really important conversation, because even working together we probably >> will not be able to build all of it – we’ll have to make hard choices about >> where to invest. One place where this broader conversation is happening is >> called “Future Audiences”, which does experiments on how to reach newer >> generations who use the internet differently than previous generations – >> and thinking particularly about video. Future Audiences has regular calls >> with community members to shape the direction of those experiments, which >> in turn inform how the broader Foundation prioritizes. I hope many of you >> will get involved in those conversations – you can sign up here. [9] >> >> Focusing back on graphs, since that’s what kicked this thread off, the >> several approaches we’ve attempted for quickly re-enabling the extension >> have ended up having security or performance problems. Therefore, we think >> that if we were to support graphs and other interactive content, we would >> need to plan substantial investment in sustainable architecture. This way, >> our approach would work securely and stably for the longer term. But that >> would take significant resources, and we’ll need to weigh it against many >> other important priorities, like tools for functionaries, improvements to >> the editing experience, automated ways to stop vandals, etc. >> >> To be clear, if we do assign resources to the planning and building of an >> architecture for graphs (and other interactive content), it means that we >> are still at least several more months away from having a working >> Foundation-supported architecture. Therefore, I think we should also be >> having the additional conversation that many others have brought up about >> what volunteers can do in these intervening months to make graphs somewhat >> available to users. I know people are talking about that concretely on the >> Phabricator task, and I will join that conversation as well. >> For the bigger question, I would like to start with some more learning >> about which kinds of interactive content are important for our >> encyclopedia, and how our community members see the evolution of the >> reading experience on our projects. I’d like to have some small >> conversations with many of you so that we can get into the details and >> ideas, joined by some of my colleagues. I’ll start reaching out to see who >> is interested in talking – and please let me know directly if you’d like to >> talk. >> >> Thank you for weighing in so far, and let’s keep talking and planning >> together. >> >> Marshall >> >> [1] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:MMiller_(WMF) >> [2] https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T334940 >> [3] >> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_Annual_Plan/2023-2024#Our_approach_for_the_future >> [4] >> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Page_Curation/2023_Moderator_Tools_project#October_20,_2023:_Final_update >> ! >> [5] >> https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Apps/Team/iOS/Watchlist#October_2023 >> [6] >> https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Apps/Team/Android/Anti_Vandalism >> [7] https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Reading/Web/Accessibility_for_reading >> [8] >> https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:WMF_support_for_Commons/Upload_Wizard_Improvements >> [9] >> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Future_Audiences#Sign_up_to_participate! >> _______________________________________________ >> Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines >> at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and >> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l >> Public archives at >> https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/CPYNFK3PDTP6YVLZU3SLOJOXYJMOQHM5/ >> To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines >> at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and >> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l >> Public archives at >> https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/OZC7KCXVZAUWPCNNALLEIV26DIRNKPX7/ >> To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines >> at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and >> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l >> Public archives at >> https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/37NDA6RB6GWQBFACPXCRN4HDPCCTMGQC/ >> To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org >> > > > -- > Boodarwun > Gnangarra > 'ngany dabakarn koorliny arn boodjera dardon nlangan Nyungar koortabodjar' > > _______________________________________________ > Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines > at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l > Public archives at > https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/LEEWTPRV6RCKJFIQ6KYZH7NTEHD54WCG/ > To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org -- James Heilman MD, CCFP-EM, Wikipedian
_______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l Public archives at https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/T7LMY7A75UQKIF7CS34HHBOIEAYLOO4E/ To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org
