I imagine something like "a shared proofreading lab" with shared tools; a "shared html/xml standard" for final book output; a "shared library" for level-4 quality books, fully and easily usable and deeply indexed for any wiki project and external users.
I presume that such goals are someway indipendent, but the strategy to get them shold consider the principle "If you are repeating yourself, you are going wrong". Alex 2013/6/2 David Cuenca <[email protected]> > Hi Billinghurst, > > Thanks for your sharing your concerns and sorry if I didn't outline the > problems in my email. I thought the main ones were already well-known, > namely: > - Redundancy of templates/modules, everything has to be done again for > each language Wikisource and it is not easy to benefit from the advances > from other communities > - Having small disperse communities makes harder to keep their tools > up-to-date and to share know-how > - Hard to have cross-language projects (like multi-lingual books) > > While on the Amsterdam Hackathon I asked several people about why the > project was split, but I didn't get a clear answer. I can imagine that it > was because back in the day there were no easy ways of localizing > templates, documentation, etc. but if you find any conversation or decision > in the archives, please do share it. > > If we, as Wikisource users, should "push harder to get components to > strengthen our community", then it is a good thing to start this debate to > know what is wanted. > The proposed centralization of modules (see below), it is only one way of > approaching it, however I think it is important to consider all options to > make sure it is the best way. > > Cheers, > David --Micru > > > On Sat, Jun 1, 2013 at 9:40 PM, billinghurst <[email protected]>wrote: > >> This seems more like "a solution in search of a problem". >> >> What is the problem? >> How is the current situation not working? >> What are you trying to solve? >> Where is the review of why the split to language communities? >> What are the benefits? >> >> If this is about shared tools, or better integration of specific >> components, then let us isolate the problems, then work to the solution. >> Pushing harder on WMF to get components that strengthen our community, >> provide a better product, and more resource productve, and are part of >> their ultimate plan is worthwhile. Starting with a solution isn't going to >> get the best result. >> >> Regards, Billinghurst >> >> >> >> On Sat, 1 Jun 2013 20:22:38 -0400, David Cuenca <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> > Hi Jane, hi Alex, >> > >> > Yes, I agree with you that a centralized Wikisource would be quite >> > meaningful, specially now that projects like Wikidata have shown that it >> is >> > possible to have both localization and centralization living in harmony. >> > I know that Doug (cc'ed) did some experiments with this goal in mind, >> but I >> > have no idea how far he is now. >> > Apart from the technical challenge, it also worries me the social >> aspect. >> > Wikisourcerors from each Wikisource and have lived in isolation from >> each >> > other for a long time. How would be a reunification perceived by the >> > different communities? Would it be something wanted? >> > >> > Andrea and me have the pending task of contacting the communities, so >> this >> > is something that we should bring up among other important topics (like >> the >> > creation of a Wikisource User Group: >> > http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_User_Groups) >> > >> > The OPW is a grant program for students similar to Google Summer of Code >> > focused on helping bring more female contributors to open source >> projects. >> > https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Outreach_Program_for_Women >> > So yes, it is a gendergap project, but we can offer wikisource-related >> > projects as we did with GsoC. >> > >> > David --Micru >> > >> > PS: Some of those plates are quite scary... I love them :) >> > >> > >> > On Sat, Jun 1, 2013 at 4:12 AM, Jane Darnell <[email protected]> wrote: >> > >> >> Hi David and Alex, >> >> I am also starting to think that one project would be a whole lot >> >> simpler, especially given the lack of cross-referencing between >> >> projects, which would be nice to have in the wikisource of many >> >> popular wikipedia languages - especially for translated texts. >> >> >> >> Years ago, while researching an urban legend, I took some photographs >> >> of the engravings and the table of contents of a Latin book and its >> >> Dutch translation a century later. At the time I was toying with the >> >> idea of cross referencing the stories but realized quickly there was >> >> no way to do this on Wikisource. I put my scans here: >> >> >> >> >> >> http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Observationes_Medicae_by_Nicolaes_Tulp >> >> >> >> Wouldn't it be easier to have just one Wikisource and have all >> >> language-related information reside in interface layers and for the >> >> language of texts, the category structure? This would make the Lua >> >> interface easier to achieve and work on. >> >> >> >> David, do you mean by "Outreach Program for Women" to refer to a >> >> specific wikisource project other than the general ones we have for >> >> the gendergap project? >> >> >> >> Jane >> >> >> >> 2013/5/31, Alex Brollo <[email protected]>: >> >> > I agree fully Micru. >> >> > Obviously, my dream is something much simpler and clear-cut: a unique >> >> > wikisource for all languages, since an unique project for any textual >> >> media >> >> > is needed IMHO just as a common project for any non-textual media is >> >> > running: Commons; and a common project for data now exists: Wikidata. >> >> > >> >> > And now, let's go to explore Lua a little bit more.... I presume, >> that >> >> > mw.loaderData() can read a table of Lua functions too, if I >> understand >> >> Lua >> >> > table features. So, shared modules could perhaps be hosted into one >> >> > data >> >> > module only. Let's try .... >> >> > >> >> > Alex >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > 2013/5/31 David Cuenca <[email protected]> >> >> > >> >> >> Hi all, >> >> >> >> >> >> After a talk with Brad Jorsch during the Hackathon (thanks again >> Brad >> >> for >> >> >> your patience), it became clear to me that Lua modules can be >> >> >> localized >> >> >> either by using system messages or by getting the project language >> >> >> code >> >> >> (mw.getContentLanguage().getCode()) and then switching the message. >> >> >> This >> >> >> second option is less integrated with the translation system, but >> can >> >> >> serve >> >> >> as intermediate step to get things running. >> >> >> >> >> >> For Wikisource it would be nice to have a central repository >> (sitting >> >> >> on >> >> >> wikisource.org) of localized Lua modules and associated templates. >> The >> >> >> documentation could be translated using Extension:Translate. These >> >> >> modules, >> >> >> templates and associated documentation would be then synchronized >> with >> >> >> all >> >> >> the language wikisources that subscribe to an opt-in list. Users >> would >> >> be >> >> >> then advised to modify the central module, thus all language >> versions >> >> >> would >> >> >> benefit of the improvements. This could be the first experiment of >> >> having >> >> >> a >> >> >> centralized repository of modules. >> >> >> >> >> >> What do you think of this? Would be anyone available to mentor an >> >> >> Outreach >> >> >> Program for Women project? >> >> >> >> >> >> Thanks, >> >> >> David Cuenca --Micru >> >> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Wikisource-l mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikisource-l >> > > > > -- > Etiamsi omnes, ego non > > _______________________________________________ > Wikisource-l mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikisource-l > >
_______________________________________________ Wikisource-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikisource-l
