2014-11-24 19:51 GMT+01:00 Andrea Zanni <[email protected]>: > Please keep up this good discussion :-) > We have the Wikisource contest on it.source right now, > so this mail is not going to be as long and detailed as I hoped. > > I agree with Vigneron that the Survey report is a good start: > having written it myself, I'm well aware that it's not perfect, and that > questions were not bulletproof, as well the methodology. > Nonetheless, we tried hard to make it and many results are as good and > trustworthy. > > I personally agree that a VE integration with the Proofread extension > would be much needed: > if you think about it, Wikisource is the right place for the VE. > We could simplify enormously the life of new proofreaders, and formatting > on Wikisource is ten times more difficult than in Wikipedia. > I'm sure it's one of the best thing to do right now. > > At the same time, I agree with Lars (who always has great insights) > that we still need to do the big leap in digital libraries. > For me, one of the thing Wikisource offers that nobody does is > *hypertextuality*, > and connections and integration with other projects as Wikidata > (hopefully) and Wikipedia. > I agree with him that algorithmic learning of Wikisource is an amazing > idea: just think about having a Tesseract instance for every Wikisource, > and the tesseract learns from every page the community proofreads... In few > years, we could even think about tell our Tesseract to distinguish between > XII century Italian vs XIX century... We could have amazing open source > OCRs to give to the world. > > Another greataccomplishment could be *giving back proofread OCR* to GLAMs: > think about libraries (or Internet Archive!) give us ancient texts, and us > giving them back a perfect djvu or PDF with mapped text inside... > I'm sure we could have many GLAMs coming to us then :-) > We cannot give them back almost anything, right now, a part from our HTML > pages. > > Aubrey >
VE integration is important and could be very useful but I'm not sure if it's really that urgent for the wikisources. In short : is VE really a priority ? On a wikisource page there is far less formatting than in a wikipedia article (but ‘touché’ : the little formatting on Wikisource could be a pain in the a**). VE has still some glitch/malstructure (my favorite : did you ever try to put a ref with a template inside ?), should we wait before adapting it to Wikisource ? (or should we start right now knowing it's a long way…). A tool like Gallica (website of the National Library of France) is testing seems more useful to me. You can test it here : https://ozalid.orange-labs.fr/ozviewer/ There's probably something to look further about a tool like http://tools.wmflabs.org/dicompte/ (compare the dump of Wikisource and Wiktionary and give the list of words in Wikisource without definition on Wiktionary) but in real time and integrated in the edit interface. Cdlt, ~nicolas
_______________________________________________ Wikisource-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikisource-l
