Perhaps some problems come from the double nature of wikisource - that is both a *typography *and a *library*. I see soma advantage from having language-specific typographies, but I can't see any advantage from having language-specific libraries; my dream would be, a Commons like architecture, to share *source texts* just as any project can share *media* .
A bold solution could be, to share texts using Commons; I'm just playing with the idea of uploading wiki text, or html, of nsPage into djvu page metadata. Alex 2015-11-29 2:19 GMT+01:00 billinghurst <[email protected]>: > There is no need for global gadgets, javascripts are able to be pulled > x-wiki now and are essentially global, and if any community wishes to > use another's gadgets they can now. If they are not usable then > request to make them usable. If they want assistance, then ask for it. > > I would think that we are looking to argue that we would be looking > for the x-Wikisource application of Module: ns to allow a one to many > pull of Module: from that space. Traditionally that has been > oldwikisource, though one would say that other wikisources have been > where more development has taken place more recently, so there is > possibly argument about where, otherwise HOW if they are to be at > (mul|old)wikisource > > I still believe that if this is a rational complaint then someone will > sit down and write down out the issues on a wiki and we can step > through them. Plaintive cries to a mailing list just creates noise, > and little action. Wistful commentary about how olden times were > better has never had a success in my simple look at history. > > Regards, Billinghurst > > On Sun, Nov 29, 2015 at 9:24 AM, Bodhisattwa Mandal > <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi, > > > > During the recent Wikisource Conference in Vienna, need for global > gadgets, > > templates and module was discussed and already it has been reported in > > Phabricator ( https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T1238 ). So someday, the > > problem will be solved. > > > > To me, it is not at all a good idea to return back to multilingual WS for > > this reason. The diversity of the language projects make Wikimedia > movement > > unique which includes Wikisource as well. Every language and scripts has > its > > own unique problem, which can not be generalised at all. Besides, if > some WS > > community choose to return back to multilingual, I think, that's > possible, > > but not every WS community would want or like to do that. > > > > Regards, > > Bodhisattwa > > > > Maybe it is "fine" but I am afraid it is only "fine" for majority (that > > speaks English or at least one major European language). As an example, > > note, that there is very few discussion in Chinese in Village pump > despite > > there is a lot Chinese users there and many of them do not speak English. > > > > It is very difficult to operate on Commons for users that speak only > Thai, > > Urdu, Bashkir, Hindi or another not highly populated language. > > > > Also there are attempts to discriminate users who do not speak / do not > > understand English. > > > > IMO, there is high risk that merging all wikisources would marginalize > > minorities or people who are not multilingual. > > > > The other issue is (I noticed it in plwikisoure) that few users come to > > wikisource because they feel bad in large wiki communities (plwiki in our > > case). (I don't know if there are similar cases in otner wikisources, but > > likely.) In case, we decide to merge projects they will leave. > > So disadvantage here is the risk of losing users that we do not have too > > many. > > > > However, there are also advantages of unification and closer cooperation. > > Question is: will they predominate? > > > > Ankry > > > >> As to the communication problems well WD and Commons are doing just > >> fine, it's no problem really. I am actually not an active contributor to > >> WS but I always had a feeling that I'd perhaps be one if it was not > >> split. It's easier to work in big project with all infrastructure ready > >> and big community to help you, in small on the other hand you have to > >> face the same 1 or 2 people or the time and personal issues may come in > >> the way of participation. > >> > >> I am not a person to have enough energy to run a major RfC in order to > >> have the WSs joined (as you can see I even failed to show my points in a > >> structured way) but if such a person shows up I'd gladly support such an > >> initiative. > >> > >> --Base > >> > >> On 27.11.2015 17:03, Alex Brollo wrote: > >>> I'm deeply convinced that splitting wikisource projects into variuos > >>> languages has been a mistake. > >>> > >>> Is anyone so bold to imagine that it is possible to revert that > mistake? > >>> > >>> Or, are we forced to travel along the/ diabolicum/ trail? > >>> > >>> Alex > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> _______________________________________________ > >>> 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 > >> > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > 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 > > > > _______________________________________________ > 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
