Magnus Manske wrote:
We'd have only two different LocalSettings files instead of one, so no big work here. But, we probably don't want to enable all options for annotation when writing a new book, and probably some other options from there in the source project.
That's why there would be a source namespace; anything in the source namespace would have special annotation functions above and beyond that allowed for other modules.
Don't get me wrong, if that was already decided a long time ago (can't remember...) then never mind.
Yes, Wikibooks has already decided to host source texts and to annotate them.
I won't go berserk if I'd find that biochemistry book next to some annotated Shakespeare text.
It won't be any closer than an article on Larry Flint is from quantum mechanics on Wikipedia.
It just seems to be something different by concept to me.
No, not at all. The whole point of Wikibooks is to host books that are used by students to learn. Part of that is source texts and the other part is textbooks. We plan to add value to those source texts by adding annotation.
No separate project needed (a sub-project of Wikibooks might be needed though).
-- Daniel Mayer (aka mav)
Daniel Mayer wrote:
No separate project needed (a sub-project of Wikibooks might be needed though).
There's no such thing as a sub-project, at least not on the software level. Either it is one project, or two. Two projects could be accessing the same database, but I don't see a reason for that, as we'd have two interfaces to show and do exactly the same thing.
Two projects could be *presented* as project and subproject, though. If we call the two projects wikibooks.org and wikisources.org, or rather textbooks.wikibooks.org and sources.wikibooks.org, doesn't make a difference, at least not to me.
Daniel Mayer wrote in part:
Magnus Manske wrote:
Don't get me wrong, if that was already decided a long time ago (can't remember...) then never mind.
Yes, Wikibooks has already decided to host source texts and to annotate them.
Well, if it's long times ago that people want, then Project Sourceberg decided to host source texts much longer ago. But it did not decide to annotate them -- Wikibooks does that.
And I agree that Wikibooks should do just that. Having a physics text and a Shakespeare anthology in the same project seems just right to me.
-- Toby
textbook-l@lists.wikimedia.org