Those sound like relatively advanced features a bit beyond the initial offering, but like useful things to provide in the long-term, yeah. I'm not sure what the status of the redirects inclusion (which is sort of a question about the underlying data source rather than the endpoint) is.
On 15 January 2016 at 11:28, Alex Druk alex.druk@gmail.com wrote:
Hi all,
My two cents to discussion about endpoints to pageview API:
- stats for categories that include all subcats and all pages,
- include redirects to article counts
All the best,
On Fri, Jan 15, 2016 at 6:05 PM, Nuria Ruiz nuria@wikimedia.org wrote:
Trying again, adding analytics@ (public e-mail list)
On Fri, Jan 15, 2016 at 5:22 AM, Marcel Ruiz Forns mforns@wikimedia.org wrote:
I also think we should start with exposing the 3 api's endpoints in a GUI, which - as Dan says - we know respond to community interests. And then ask the community for more input, that could mean improvements to the tool, new endpoints or completely new ideas...
On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 10:45 PM, Dan Andreescu dandreescu@wikimedia.org wrote:
I'm ok if people want to take an iterative approach, I just want to point out that the usage information is not very indicative of value at this point. The API is not widely used and the per-article endpoint is expected to be hit much much more than per-project or top simply because the queries are many orders of magnitude more granular. So we can't really judge importance from that comparison.
On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 4:43 PM, Leila Zia leila@wikimedia.org wrote:
On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 1:09 PM, Dan Andreescu dandreescu@wikimedia.org wrote:
> > My question is: How are we going to define the requirements for the > tool? I was planning to get some community input on defining which stats > would help contributors the most. What do you think?
My opinion here is that we should just expose everything the pageview API is capable of. It's only 3 different end points and they were chosen based on what the community found useful. As we add more endpoints we can keep checking if visualization is important. But of course if others have other more specific plans, we can wait for those tools to be built and iterate.
Building up on Dan's suggestion: I'd go with communicating and/or discussing the following with the community:
- the 3 different metrics we can offer a UI for
- what other metrics they find useful for their work. This will help us
collect information about what other kind of metrics we should offer as an end-point if we decide to add to the end-points (pageview per article by country has come up many times, for example)
- whether they consider the wish as satisfied if we offer a UI for the
3 different metrics, and perhaps over time add more metrics to the UI as they become available (not necessarily in 2016).
Leila
-- Marcel Ruiz Forns Analytics Developer Wikimedia Foundation
Analytics mailing list Analytics@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/analytics
-- Thank you.
Alex Druk, PhD wikipediatrends.com alex.druk@gmail.com (775) 237-8550 Google voice
Analytics mailing list Analytics@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/analytics