On 7/3/07, Barcex <barcexwiki(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I Agree on this point, and think that the real problems why Commons is not
> so successful are not related to its name but to the MediaWiki software (as
> is now) that is very good to write encyclopedias but awful to implement an
> image bank. The concept of "wiki" (easy edit with full history of changes)
> is very useful for our needs, but the implementation with MediaWiki is far
> from being good.
>
> Barcex
>
This issue has come up multiple times, but without much result. What
specific features does Commons need to have? A list of this might be
interesting, because their are very likely users who are willing to
implement those kind of things, either as an extension, javascript
hack or external service.
Bryan