I remember when we tried to make a partnership with a scholar who works with ancient texts. He needed some Italian translation of Greek texts in Wikisource, but he was much more interested in validated/proofread text *without* formatting, than the contrary. 75% for us is formatted, always. But, arguably, for people it's easier to correct typos and proofread than format with strange templates and codes. We always assume that people know how Wikisource works, how wikicode works, etc.
A brand new quality workflow could be beneficial. Aubrey On Fri, Nov 11, 2016 at 9:54 AM, Alex Brollo <[email protected]> wrote: > .... coupled with a KISSing approach it could run perhaps.... :-) > > Alex > > 2016-11-11 9:37 GMT+01:00 Sam Wilson <[email protected]>: > >> Yes, makes sense! Or a series of attributes like: >> >> proofread once? >> proofread twice? >> formatted? >> all images added? >> hyperlinked? >> transcluded? >> read in context with other pages? >> etc. >> >> Only some of which need be linear. >> >> And only when all are done is the thing considered bonzer. :-) >> >> —sam >> >> On Fri, 11 Nov 2016, at 04:17 PM, Alex Brollo wrote: >> >> I'd like to state a "binary page quality" splitting the workflow into its >> basic steps (proofreading of text; formatting; adding links; >> validating....), t.i. into a set of true/false states, clearly showing the >> list of lacking steps. I.e. sometimes I fastly add complex formatting to >> rough text, and this results into a exotic "level" proofreading=false, >> formatting=true. It's a level 1, but it is deeply different from a level 1 >> coming from proofreading=true, formatting=false. >> Obviously the whole "binary level" could be simply stored as a number, >> with useful information into it. >> Alex >> >> 2016-11-11 8:32 GMT+01:00 Sam Wilson <[email protected]>: >> >> >> That sounds really interesting! Do you mean as a way for people >> unfamiliar with Wikisource to easily contribute notes and corrections? On >> the face of things, it could perhaps work by storing the notes in a the >> Page_talk namspace and doing some clever thing to display them on the Page >> (and perhaps in main) namespaces. >> >> It seems like it'd be cool to be able to get "typo reports" or something, >> from people who mightn't have any idea of Wikisource other than that's >> where they got an epub. >> >> To rate a page, we currently have the various levels of proofreading >> quality. Is this not sufficient? And does the current Index page overview >> of all of a book's statuses work for you? I sometimes wonder if we need >> another rating, above 'validated', that indicates that a whole book has >> been read through and (hopefully) any remaining typos have been found. >> >> >> —sam >> >> >> On Fri, 11 Nov 2016, at 12:27 AM, mathieu stumpf guntz wrote: >> >> Hmm, at the conference I think someone was interested in a feature to >> make comments on texts, like you can make on some word processors for >> example. That may be interesting, but how you render the result might be a >> huge user interface problem. One should be able to choose whom comments >> should be visible… >> >> Otherwise, I would still be happy to have more flexibable way to "rate" a >> page. That is, a page might be text proof readed, but laking some css, or a >> picture should be extracted etc. Having a way to see that for all pages in >> the book: namespace would be fine. >> >> ĝis baldaŭ >> >> Le 10/11/2016 à 06:09, Sam Wilson a écrit : >> >> Thanks Alex :) It's a minor project so far, but I reckon the work you've >> been doing on making a better, bigger, more proofreading-focused >> interface is really good. Do stick a proposal up! >> >> So far, we've got: >> >> * Add a 'clean' method for side-titles, and side notes to parser >> * A spelling- and typo-checking system for proofreading >> * Visual Editor menu refresh >> * upload text wizard >> * Language links in Wikisource for edition items in Wikidata >> * Display subpage name in category >> * Make Special:IndexPage transcludeable >> * Fix Extension:Cite to get rid of foibles >> >> If anyone's got half-formed ideas, I'd encourage you to post something, >> or just post to this mailing list, and we can all have a chat about it. >> :) >> >> —sam >> >> >> On Wed, 9 Nov 2016, at 04:50 PM, Alex Brollo wrote: >> >> I too could add *some* proposals.... but the first one could be a deep >> revision of nsPage edit interface to got the goal "fixed tools, almost full >> screen scrolling text & image". In the meantime, I'm go on testing >> FullScreenEditing.js by Sam, that presently is an excellent, running step >> approximating such a goal. >> >> Alex >> >> 2016-11-09 1:03 GMT+01:00 Sam Wilson <[email protected]> >> <[email protected]>: >> >> __ >> Huzza for Wikisource; we've currently got more proposals than any of the >> other categories (not that it's a competition, but still...). >> >> @Micru: this whole topic of how to represent bibliographic data in WD and >> properly link it in Wikisource is great! I'm looking forward to helping. :-) >> >> >> —sam >> >> >> >> On Tue, 8 Nov 2016, at 10:08 PM, David Cuenca Tudela wrote: >> >> Hi Thomas, >> thanks for bringing that up! I wrote a proposal to finish the work >> retrieving the language links from several editions and represent them in >> wikisource as language links. >> >> To write or vote exiting Wikisource proposals, the link >> is:https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/2016_Community_Wishlist_Survey/Categories/Wikisource >> Cheers, >> Micru >> >> On Tue, Nov 8, 2016 at 10:06 AM, Thomas PT <[email protected]> >> <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> Hello everyone, >> >> The Wikimedia Foundation Community Tech team has launched a new "Community >> Wishlist Survey". >> Last year survey allowed us to get WMF staff time to work on using Google >> OCR in Wikisource that allowed some Indian languages Wikisources to raise >> and on VisualEditor support. >> >> Please, take time to submit new wishes and comment them. It could be simple >> things (e.g. a new gadget for a specific workflow) or very complicated ones >> (e.g. native TEI support). >> >> Cheers, >> >> Thomas >> >> >> >> Début du message réexpédié : >> >> *De: *Johan Jönsson <[email protected]> <[email protected]> >> *Objet: **[Wikitech-ambassadors] Your help needed: Community Wishlist Survey >> 2016* >> *Date: *7 novembre 2016 à 20:26:21 UTC+1 >> *À: *Wikitech Ambassadors <[email protected]> >> <[email protected]> >> *Répondre à: *Coordination of technology deployments across >> languages/projects <[email protected]> >> <[email protected]> >> >> Hi everyone, >> >> Last year, the Community Tech team did a survey for a community wishlist to >> decide what we shoudl be working on throughout the year. Since it's useful >> to have a list of tasks from the Wikimedia communities, it's also been used >> by other developers, >> >> been the focus of Wikimedia hackathons and so on. In short, I think it >> matters. >> >> Now we're doing the process again. >> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/2016_Community_Wishlist_Survey >> >> If you'd feel like spreading this in your communities, it would be much >> appreciated. >> >> *) This is when you can suggest things. This phase will last from 7 November >> to 20 November. >> *) Editors who are not comfortable writing in English can write proposals in >> their language. >> *) Voting will take place 28 November to 12 December. >> >> Thanks, >> >> //Johan Jönsson >> -- >> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Wikitech-ambassadors mailing >> [email protected]https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-ambassadors >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Wikisource-l mailing >> [email protected]https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikisource-l >> >> -- >> Etiamsi omnes, ego non >> _________________________________________________ >> Wikisource-l mailing >> [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 >> [email protected]https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikisource-l >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Wikisource-l mailing >> [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 > >
_______________________________________________ Wikisource-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikisource-l
