On Sun, Jul 19, 2009 at 2:42 PM, Tim Landscheidt <tim(a)tim-landscheidt.de>wrote;wrote:
"Happy-melon" <happy-melon(a)live.com>
wrote:
We need to think a little bit outside the box,
here; this domain should
really be available, and make sense to use, for *all* WMF sites.
http://www.wm.org is only occupied by a websquatter at the moment,
AFAICT; I
it
would be
http://wm.org/enwiki/Foo; the worst-case
scenario is AFAIK
http://wm.org/mediawikiwiki/Foo; still only 28 characters plus the
title.
Use one of the qqx reserved codes for stuff like
copyright, and you have
a
complete service.
[...]
To think outside the box would be to apply for a URN scheme
and have popular browsers implement it (like "wp:" in Kon-
queror for example). It cannot get cleaner than that, and we
would not have to worry about operations issues either :-).
Tim
Even better, you could have the most popular search engines rank many
Wikipedia articles as the first result for their titles and have the most
popular browsers automatically search for whatever keywords you type into
the address bar. (Astute readers will note this is already the case). Of
course, this doesn't get around the CC URL license terms (neither does the
URI solution, AFAICT), but it points out the sillyness in requiring a URL in
the first place.
In my opinion the requirement that you link to the CC license is simply to
raise awareness of CC itself and has nothing to do with usability. Finding
the source and stable copy of the content you are looking at is trivial, and
thus so is finding its license. This true with only keywords and without
URLs/URIs.