Hello everyone,
I'm not one who usually writes on these lists, but since it seems like a good way to get others opinions (and ince I've already formed my own), I thought it was a good way to see what others had to say and think.
The mobile team for the iOS app (who are all awesome!) has recently released (in beta) a version of the app which incorporates Apple Maps a one of it's main feature, to find articles nearby.
"The Wikipedia iOS app has released a beta version (5.4.0 1081) which uses Apple maps as its map data source. This is not an easy decision and has already sparked some discussion of whether this is acceptable given our project's values."
These maps are not free (non-libre) and is in my strong opinion against our values. We only create and publish things which are freely licensed (with fair use imagery being the only exception, after a board resolution regarding EDP's).
Some reasons why this was done can be read here: https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Apps/Team/iOS/Maps_service
I was asked if we could use non-free elements as long as we said it was non-free and you may not be allowed to re-ue it, and I responded with "If we can't find enough editors for Wikipedia, would it ever be alright if we copied text from Britannica, as long as we said it was from Britannica, and that reusers can not use it" i.e. just because we can't make something, doesn't mean we should use something else (non-free thing) to reach our 'wants', if it causes us to loose what is... 'us'.
I'm seeking imput and opinions from you all whether this i allowed or not our according to values, which states:
"An essential part of the Wikimedia Foundation's mission is encouraging the development of free-content educational resources that may be created, used, and reused by the entire human community. We believe that this mission requires thriving open formats and open standards on the web to allow the creation of content not subject to restrictions on creation, use, and reuse.
At the creation level, we want to provide the editing community with freely-licensed tools for participation and collaboration. Our community should also have the freedom to fork thanks to freely available dumps.
The community will in turn create a body of knowledge which can be distributed freely throughout the world, viewable or playable by free software tools."
I think it depends how it's being used. If the nonfree content is presented as an integral part of the interface, such as inline with the article, that's a problem. On the other hand, if the interface just allows the separate Apple Maps to be pulled up, that's a bit different. We frequently link to offsite nonfree content when, for example, we cite such a source as a reference. It only becomes a major issue when it's presented as part of an article.
My more major concern is, would this be a privacy issue? That concern has been brought up before, I think for quite valid reasons, with for example social media "Share this" buttons. Would this allow Apple to gather data on what a reader is reading?
Todd
On Fri, Mar 10, 2017 at 7:59 PM, Jonatan Svensson Glad < gladjonatan@outlook.com> wrote:
Hello everyone,
I'm not one who usually writes on these lists, but since it seems like a good way to get others opinions (and ince I've already formed my own), I thought it was a good way to see what others had to say and think.
The mobile team for the iOS app (who are all awesome!) has recently released (in beta) a version of the app which incorporates Apple Maps a one of it's main feature, to find articles nearby.
"The Wikipedia iOS app has released a beta version (5.4.0 1081) which uses Apple maps as its map data source. This is not an easy decision and has already sparked some discussion of whether this is acceptable given our project's values."
These maps are not free (non-libre) and is in my strong opinion against our values. We only create and publish things which are freely licensed (with fair use imagery being the only exception, after a board resolution regarding EDP's).
Some reasons why this was done can be read here: https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Apps/Team/iOS/Maps_service
I was asked if we could use non-free elements as long as we said it was non-free and you may not be allowed to re-ue it, and I responded with "If we can't find enough editors for Wikipedia, would it ever be alright if we copied text from Britannica, as long as we said it was from Britannica, and that reusers can not use it" i.e. just because we can't make something, doesn't mean we should use something else (non-free thing) to reach our 'wants', if it causes us to loose what is... 'us'.
I'm seeking imput and opinions from you all whether this i allowed or not our according to values, which states:
"An essential part of the Wikimedia Foundation's mission is encouraging the development of free-content educational resources that may be created, used, and reused by the entire human community. We believe that this mission requires thriving open formats and open standards on the web to allow the creation of content not subject to restrictions on creation, use, and reuse.
At the creation level, we want to provide the editing community with freely-licensed tools for participation and collaboration. Our community should also have the freedom to fork thanks to freely available dumps.
The community will in turn create a body of knowledge which can be distributed freely throughout the world, viewable or playable by free software tools." _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Why are we not using OSM? I know Yuri created tiles within the WMF system of services and those are what Wikivoyage uses. Wikivoyage was once using no open maps that were not hosted locally which was a breach of our privacy policy. Thankfully Yuri created the solution mentioned once the issue was discussed. Maybe he could help with this aswell?
James
On Fri, Mar 10, 2017 at 8:37 PM, Todd Allen toddmallen@gmail.com wrote:
I think it depends how it's being used. If the nonfree content is presented as an integral part of the interface, such as inline with the article, that's a problem. On the other hand, if the interface just allows the separate Apple Maps to be pulled up, that's a bit different. We frequently link to offsite nonfree content when, for example, we cite such a source as a reference. It only becomes a major issue when it's presented as part of an article.
My more major concern is, would this be a privacy issue? That concern has been brought up before, I think for quite valid reasons, with for example social media "Share this" buttons. Would this allow Apple to gather data on what a reader is reading?
Todd
On Fri, Mar 10, 2017 at 7:59 PM, Jonatan Svensson Glad < gladjonatan@outlook.com> wrote:
Hello everyone,
I'm not one who usually writes on these lists, but since it seems like a good way to get others opinions (and ince I've already formed my own), I thought it was a good way to see what others had to say and think.
The mobile team for the iOS app (who are all awesome!) has recently released (in beta) a version of the app which incorporates Apple Maps a
one
of it's main feature, to find articles nearby.
"The Wikipedia iOS app has released a beta version (5.4.0 1081) which
uses
Apple maps as its map data source. This is not an easy decision and has already sparked some discussion of whether this is acceptable given our project's values."
These maps are not free (non-libre) and is in my strong opinion against our values. We only create and publish things which are freely licensed (with fair use imagery being the only exception, after a board resolution regarding EDP's).
Some reasons why this was done can be read here: https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Apps/Team/iOS/Maps_service
I was asked if we could use non-free elements as long as we said it was non-free and you may not be allowed to re-ue it, and I responded with "If we can't find enough editors for Wikipedia, would it ever be alright if
we
copied text from Britannica, as long as we said it was from Britannica,
and
that reusers can not use it" i.e. just because we can't make something, doesn't mean we should use something else (non-free thing) to reach our 'wants', if it causes us to loose what is... 'us'.
I'm seeking imput and opinions from you all whether this i allowed or not our according to values, which states:
"An essential part of the Wikimedia Foundation's mission is encouraging the development of free-content educational resources that may be
created,
used, and reused by the entire human community. We believe that this mission requires thriving open formats and open standards on the web to allow the creation of content not subject to restrictions on creation,
use,
and reuse.
At the creation level, we want to provide the editing community with freely-licensed tools for participation and collaboration. Our community should also have the freedom to fork thanks to freely available dumps.
The community will in turn create a body of knowledge which can be distributed freely throughout the world, viewable or playable by free software tools." _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Hoi, What I do not understand is why? We have had maps and nearby functionality for a very long time 2014 based on Wikidata [1]. It has the benefit of being of use in any of our languages much more than what Apple has to offer. This was developed at the Hackathon in Vienna.
OSM maps have as a benefit that they serve countries like Haiti much better [2]. It is why Doctors Without Borders use their maps and not others [2].
A third reason is that by concentrating on the Apple API and kits we are not developing for the majority of smart phones.
A fourth reason is that it will enhance the cooperation with the OSM community.
A final reason is that we are already Wikidatafying Commons; this will have a geo location part as well and consequently I do not see any advantages in anything but a Wikidata approach to maps because through queries we can target Wikipedia articles in a language. A final argument, it will drive more people to add labels in Wikidata in the language where our coverage is now not so good. Including English in China. Thanks, GerardM
PS I do have an iPhone.
[1] http://ultimategerardm.blogspot.nl/2014/05/wmhack-maps-and-wikidata-ii.html [2] http://ultimategerardm.blogspot.nl/2011/03/need-for-up-to-date-maps.html
On 11 March 2017 at 03:59, Jonatan Svensson Glad gladjonatan@outlook.com wrote:
Hello everyone,
I'm not one who usually writes on these lists, but since it seems like a good way to get others opinions (and ince I've already formed my own), I thought it was a good way to see what others had to say and think.
The mobile team for the iOS app (who are all awesome!) has recently released (in beta) a version of the app which incorporates Apple Maps a one of it's main feature, to find articles nearby.
"The Wikipedia iOS app has released a beta version (5.4.0 1081) which uses Apple maps as its map data source. This is not an easy decision and has already sparked some discussion of whether this is acceptable given our project's values."
These maps are not free (non-libre) and is in my strong opinion against our values. We only create and publish things which are freely licensed (with fair use imagery being the only exception, after a board resolution regarding EDP's).
Some reasons why this was done can be read here: https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Apps/Team/iOS/Maps_service
I was asked if we could use non-free elements as long as we said it was non-free and you may not be allowed to re-ue it, and I responded with "If we can't find enough editors for Wikipedia, would it ever be alright if we copied text from Britannica, as long as we said it was from Britannica, and that reusers can not use it" i.e. just because we can't make something, doesn't mean we should use something else (non-free thing) to reach our 'wants', if it causes us to loose what is... 'us'.
I'm seeking imput and opinions from you all whether this i allowed or not our according to values, which states:
"An essential part of the Wikimedia Foundation's mission is encouraging the development of free-content educational resources that may be created, used, and reused by the entire human community. We believe that this mission requires thriving open formats and open standards on the web to allow the creation of content not subject to restrictions on creation, use, and reuse.
At the creation level, we want to provide the editing community with freely-licensed tools for participation and collaboration. Our community should also have the freedom to fork thanks to freely available dumps.
The community will in turn create a body of knowledge which can be distributed freely throughout the world, viewable or playable by free software tools." _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
I am surprised that this discussion would be held now, *after* the work has been done. Was it really not possible to plan ahead and have this discussion before doing work that might turn out to be wasted? Was it really so hard to predict this difficulty? Who was in charge?
"Rogol"
On Sat, Mar 11, 2017 at 6:34 AM, Gerard Meijssen gerard.meijssen@gmail.com wrote:
Hoi, What I do not understand is why? We have had maps and nearby functionality for a very long time 2014 based on Wikidata [1]. It has the benefit of being of use in any of our languages much more than what Apple has to offer. This was developed at the Hackathon in Vienna.
OSM maps have as a benefit that they serve countries like Haiti much better [2]. It is why Doctors Without Borders use their maps and not others [2].
A third reason is that by concentrating on the Apple API and kits we are not developing for the majority of smart phones.
A fourth reason is that it will enhance the cooperation with the OSM community.
A final reason is that we are already Wikidatafying Commons; this will have a geo location part as well and consequently I do not see any advantages in anything but a Wikidata approach to maps because through queries we can target Wikipedia articles in a language. A final argument, it will drive more people to add labels in Wikidata in the language where our coverage is now not so good. Including English in China. Thanks, GerardM
PS I do have an iPhone.
[1] http://ultimategerardm.blogspot.nl/2014/05/wmhack- maps-and-wikidata-ii.html [2] http://ultimategerardm.blogspot.nl/2011/03/need-for- up-to-date-maps.html
On 11 March 2017 at 03:59, Jonatan Svensson Glad gladjonatan@outlook.com wrote:
Hello everyone,
I'm not one who usually writes on these lists, but since it seems like a good way to get others opinions (and ince I've already formed my own), I thought it was a good way to see what others had to say and think.
The mobile team for the iOS app (who are all awesome!) has recently released (in beta) a version of the app which incorporates Apple Maps a
one
of it's main feature, to find articles nearby.
"The Wikipedia iOS app has released a beta version (5.4.0 1081) which
uses
Apple maps as its map data source. This is not an easy decision and has already sparked some discussion of whether this is acceptable given our project's values."
These maps are not free (non-libre) and is in my strong opinion against our values. We only create and publish things which are freely licensed (with fair use imagery being the only exception, after a board resolution regarding EDP's).
Some reasons why this was done can be read here: https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Apps/Team/iOS/Maps_service
I was asked if we could use non-free elements as long as we said it was non-free and you may not be allowed to re-ue it, and I responded with "If we can't find enough editors for Wikipedia, would it ever be alright if
we
copied text from Britannica, as long as we said it was from Britannica,
and
that reusers can not use it" i.e. just because we can't make something, doesn't mean we should use something else (non-free thing) to reach our 'wants', if it causes us to loose what is... 'us'.
I'm seeking imput and opinions from you all whether this i allowed or not our according to values, which states:
"An essential part of the Wikimedia Foundation's mission is encouraging the development of free-content educational resources that may be
created,
used, and reused by the entire human community. We believe that this mission requires thriving open formats and open standards on the web to allow the creation of content not subject to restrictions on creation,
use,
and reuse.
At the creation level, we want to provide the editing community with freely-licensed tools for participation and collaboration. Our community should also have the freedom to fork thanks to freely available dumps.
The community will in turn create a body of knowledge which can be distributed freely throughout the world, viewable or playable by free software tools." _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Hi Jonatan,
Thanks for this email, it's relevant to the general wikimedia list & community.
I broadly agree with you: we should aim to strengthen and expand the universe of free knowledge, including every building block along the way: so that others can replicate both toolchain and result on their own backends.
In practice, I think that means: releasing a Beta feature that uses non-free libraries is ok, if the goal is to get feedback, test iterations, and replace them with free libraries. Releasing a completed tool that uses non-free libraries might be ok if there is currently no free alternative whatever, and the creation/curation benefits of having the tool are significant; in such cases we should still plan partnerships or other methods for replacing those libraries.
When it comes to serving maps, integrating map features with iOS, and OSM: a more basic issue comes into play. We should support OSM development and improvement 100% as though it were part of our own mission. Because it is! Maps are an increasingly large part of knowledge capture, discovery, sharing, and prioritization. It's important to get this right not just on the scale of the roadmap of a single feature by a single staff development team, but as a movement. (The movement devoted to global knowledge access; not just the subset covered by current .W. projects & tools!) Getting it right here can mean many things, but definitely includes over time * Ensuring there is a free map ecosystem that is as good as any proprietary one * Working side-by-side with the OSM community, spiritually and practically (and not alienating one another around minor factional differences)
Clearly OSM benefits from working through any practical/accessibility reasons that make it hard for app-developers to use OSM maps rather than Apple Maps. So let's work directly with them to solve this. This WP app offers a richly detailed use case, and a new channel for people to potentially discover and contribute to OSM; OSM devs are experts at identifying existing solutions or building new ones. There are nuances of how funding / development / production happens across the various subcommunities, teams, foundations and third-parties, and more than one way to do it. [does WMF fund pure OSM development in parallel to supporting WP feature work? Support community development around crossovers between our networks? does OSM or MB fund some wiki work as part of outreach+expansion?] This shouldn't prevent getting this right — just as temporary gaps in a fully free toolchain shouldn't prevent running tests with a proprietary library in the interim.
Warmly, Sam
On Fri, Mar 10, 2017 at 9:59 PM, Jonatan Svensson Glad < gladjonatan@outlook.com> wrote:
Hello everyone,
I'm not one who usually writes on these lists, but since it seems like a good way to get others opinions (and ince I've already formed my own), I thought it was a good way to see what others had to say and think.
The mobile team for the iOS app (who are all awesome!) has recently released (in beta) a version of the app which incorporates Apple Maps a one of it's main feature, to find articles nearby.
"The Wikipedia iOS app has released a beta version (5.4.0 1081) which uses Apple maps as its map data source. This is not an easy decision and has already sparked some discussion of whether this is acceptable given our project's values."
These maps are not free (non-libre) and is in my strong opinion against our values. We only create and publish things which are freely licensed (with fair use imagery being the only exception, after a board resolution regarding EDP's).
Some reasons why this was done can be read here: https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Apps/Team/iOS/Maps_service
I was asked if we could use non-free elements as long as we said it was non-free and you may not be allowed to re-ue it, and I responded with "If we can't find enough editors for Wikipedia, would it ever be alright if we copied text from Britannica, as long as we said it was from Britannica, and that reusers can not use it" i.e. just because we can't make something, doesn't mean we should use something else (non-free thing) to reach our 'wants', if it causes us to loose what is... 'us'.
I'm seeking imput and opinions from you all whether this i allowed or not our according to values, which states:
"An essential part of the Wikimedia Foundation's mission is encouraging the development of free-content educational resources that may be created, used, and reused by the entire human community. We believe that this mission requires thriving open formats and open standards on the web to allow the creation of content not subject to restrictions on creation, use, and reuse.
At the creation level, we want to provide the editing community with freely-licensed tools for participation and collaboration. Our community should also have the freedom to fork thanks to freely available dumps.
The community will in turn create a body of knowledge which can be distributed freely throughout the world, viewable or playable by free software tools." _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org