Daniel Mayer wrote:
>Targuin wrote:
>
>
>>What does it take for things to HAPPEN around
>>here? I've not seen any decent objections, and
>>we all seem to agree on the fundamentals.
>>
>>
>
>OK, I'll come out against having a separate Wikisource project since that is
>part of the whole reason of having Wikibooks.
>
I thought the purpose of Wikibooks was to create original, freely
licensed (FDL) textbooks.
If annotated public domain works are within this mission, then great,
start putting in them books! But it's a bit of a surprise to me, and
probably to many others. Perhaps we need a clearer WikiMedia Project Map
of some sort so the left hand knows what the right is doing. :)
-- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)
Anthere wrote:
>If the solution is this one, it should be discussed
>whether the current english textbook should be
>moved from http://textbook.wikipedia.org/ to
>http://en.textbook.wikipedia.org/ .
It would either be http://en.wikibooks.org or http://wikibooks.org/en/.
http://wikibooks.org would be a multilanguage portal.
However, I'm warming to the idea of internally segregating the projects as I
explained before, instead of external segregation (subdomain and different
MediaWiki installations; just like on Wikipedia). All I really care about is
having a clean database, so if language category tags and a user preference
to set interface language can do most of what we want, then, IMO, let's plan
to do that. But doing that requires brand new changes to MediaWiki, while
doing things the old way only requires adding the wiki book functionality
(not an absolute requirement before internationalization, but IMO /very/
important).
Hey, I just got a neat idea; language category tags can be used to set a users
interface language. So if they visit a module that has a French language tag,
then their interface will magically become French. Then when they back out to
an English module, their interface automatically becomes English again! User
preferences would then be used to override this if the user wants.
This would also be really neat to have on meta.
Oh and this is about internationalization, so it is very appropriate to have
this thread on Intlwiki-l. The mailing lists are going to eventually be moved
to @wikimedia.org in the near future anyway since we are no longer just about
Wikipedia.
-- Daniel Mayer (aka mav)
>From what I understand, this mailing list is for the
non-English Wikipedias and not for Wikibooks. Could
we move the international discussion of Wikibooks to
another list, please?
Thank you,
Chuck
We were not discussing wikibook, we were discussing
whether wikibook was english restricted or not (ie, if
internationals should wait for the project to be have
a better stand first, before coming in for a non
english book) or whether we should specifically set
another site for each language because of the numerous
links, rc... issues.
If the current site is common to all languages, you
are right that this matter makes no sense here and the
subject moved to the appropriate list.
If the site is english only, the textbook mailing list
is about the english project only, then there is no
place to discuss it really, and this one is probably
the best choice to host discussion where non english
are involved.
Also, if it is is made clear that the current site is
english only (and for many of the reasons given by
mav, such as the rc, the common main page etc...),
then it should be made clear. Later on, when some
non-english people feel like doing a book, they will
just have to ask for a new site for this, and set
their own rules, obviously inspired from the current
one.
If the solution is this one, it should be discussed
whether the current english textbook should be moved
from http://textbook.wikipedia.org/ to
http://en.textbook.wikipedia.org/ .
No ?
Anthere
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software
http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com
Could somebody who knows how, organize the textbooks into
columns on the main page ? Like, a vertical list of the
science textbooks next to a list of the language ones, etc.
It seems like with the number of textbooks it will be
easier to scan them that way. It could be sort of like the
main page of the Wikipedia site. You see the category
header and then scan right down the list ..
Thanks to whoever can do it and wants to try.
--Karl
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software
http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com
Sanford Forte wrote:
>If a school district, or a private printer, want to
>satisfy the general frameworks required by a
>specific state, *all* of the material should be
>able to clear, *without* hassles.
How is mixing and matching incompatible licenses in the same book making
things easier? All this does is make it a bigger hassle for the school
districts; now instead of adhering to the terms of one license, they have to
adhere to the terms of more than one and possibly many.
>For maximum impact, *every* basic curriculum taken
>on by WP should have *all* materials available as
>non-GNU-limited...even if that means starting from
>scratch with some modules for which there is already
>GNU-limited content available.
What is so limiting about the GNU FDL? It was specifically written for
textbooks and manuals.
>I can just see a sales representative form Prentice Hall
>(all the way up to the CEO of that company's textbook
>division) wining and dining textbook committee people
>from various states and bringing stuff like this up just
>before srucial votes are cast to accept or not accept
>certain books for district consideration.
And they would not do the same for any other copyleft textbook?
>Also, I can see the 'copyright police', prompted by
>commercial publishers, trying to intimidate privae
>and home schools into doing certain things with
>GNU-limited material. This industry knows how to
>use 'dirty'tricks to get its way.
Since the text is free, then how are they going to do that? We already plan to
work with the GNU people to fix the parts of the license we don't like.
-- Daniel Mayer (aka mav)
My bad, I realized that the archives at MIT are all public
domain texts. So I could use those.
http://the-tech.mit.edu/Shakespeare/
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software
http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com
I'm interested in starting up a test version of the
annotated document idea with a copy of one of Shakespeare's
plays (I'm partial to Othello).
Is there any further software we need before we can start ?
Barring objections, I plan to get in touch with the
University of Virginia Library (
http://etext.lib.virginia.edu/conditions.html ) for
permission to use their copy. It isn't public domain. Does
anyone know of a (good) public domain version of
Shakespeare's works available on the web ?
--Karl
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software
http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com
Jimbo wrote:
>Anything released under FDL 1.x or 2.0 with no
>invariant sections, no Front-Cover texts, and no
>Back-Cover texts can be distributed under the
>terms of LFDL 2.0 *or* FDL 2.0. Anything release
>under FDL 1.x with invariant sections can be released
>under FDL 2.0.
>
>And then LFDL can be simpler and worded carefully
>so as to maximize compatibility with CC SA.
Hm. I think you may be on to something here that we could all agree with; I
get the simplicity and internal copy/paste harmony within Wikimedia that I
want, and Toby et al get to redistribute any Wikimedia material under the CC
Att/SA.
But will it work? Could we wholesale relicense all Wikimedia content under the
LFDL if FDL 2.0 said we could?
-- Daniel Mayer (aka mav)
Please show me ANY evidence that RMS and the FSF will be
flexible about changing their licensing terms how we want
them.
Otherwise lets get new modules released in some way that is
*not* exclusively GNU FDL.
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software
http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com
I am going to make one last plea here as we are
contemplating a WikiU / Wikiversity site .. we are about to
create tons of new content so lets get the licensing thing
right from the beginning.
It would be a setback to not be able to use previously
developed materials but lets get it right while this
project is in its infancy. The more I learn about RMS the
less likely it seems that he is going to show any
flexibiity or go along with ideas that arent his own. So
lets make sure that the new content that we are creating
isnt subject to his whims and control of the GNU FDL, lets
at least make it so that the Wikiversity retains the right
to release all submissions under whatever other license
that it wants later on. Right now there are many
restrictions on how to use the material and WikiMedia /
Wikiversity doesnt control it, RMS does. Lets get it all
into the hands of the Wikiversity.
--Karl
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software
http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com