On Tue, Feb 23, 2016 at 10:21 PM, Matthew Flaschen mflaschen@wikimedia.org wrote:
On 02/21/2016 11:03 PM, Andreas Kolbe wrote:
So, if you speak of structurally connecting *open* sources, as a basis for smart editing tools, you seem to be saying that such copyrighted yet openly accessible sources, as well as all genuinely paywalled sources, should be excluded from these efforts.
If that's correct, and I am not misunderstanding what you mean to say here (please correct me if I do!), how do you square it with the Wikimedia vision?
She did not say anything about excluding references to proprietary sources like those you mentioned above. I think we're all in agreement they will still be referenced.
Thanks for your reply, Matt. At the Knowledge Engine FAQ on Meta, your colleague Chris Koerner told me, when I asked what criteria a source will have to fulfil in order to be included in the Knowledge Engine's search results, that he personally believed "that not only should the sources be open-access, but they should be in agreement with our other values, neutral point of view, free license, etc."
So evidently we're not *all* in agreement.
She described possible enhanced support for including/connecting to open data. That may not be possible/advisable to do for proprietary data, which might require proprietary licenses or software.
Enhanced support for including/connecting open data could, I guess, benefit both editors adding that data to a Wikimedia project's page (Magnus tweeted an interesting application earlier today, see [[Falkensee]] in the English Wikipedia) and commercial re-users.
Of course, it depends on the actual details, but as an analogy think of how fair use images are allowed on some specific projects (e.g. English Wikipedia), but the central repositories (Wikimedia Commons and Wikidata) only include open content/data.
Thanks. That is a good analogy.
I see that there is now a record of a candid discussion between Lila and the Discovery team of what happened with the Knowledge Engine project here:
https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Discovery/2016-02-16_Discussing_Knowledge_Eng...
That is good to see.
Best, Andreas