Hi Billinghurst,
Thanks for your sharing your concerns and sorry if I didn't outline the problems in my email. I thought the main ones were already well-known, namely:
- Redundancy of templates/modules, everything has to be done again for each language Wikisource and it is not easy to benefit from the advances from other communities
- Having small disperse communities makes harder to keep their tools up-to-date and to share know-how
- Hard to have cross-language projects (like multi-lingual books)
While on the Amsterdam Hackathon I asked several people about why the project was split, but I didn't get a clear answer. I can imagine that it was because back in the day there were no easy ways of localizing templates, documentation, etc. but if you find any conversation or decision in the archives, please do share it.
If we, as Wikisource users, should "push harder to get components to strengthen our community", then it is a good thing to start this debate to know what is wanted.
The proposed centralization of modules (see below), it is only one way of approaching it, however I think it is important to consider all options to make sure it is the best way.
Cheers,
David --Micru
On Sat, Jun 1, 2013 at 9:40 PM, billinghurst <billinghurst@gmail.com> wrote:
This seems more like "a solution in search of a problem".
What is the problem?
How is the current situation not working?
What are you trying to solve?
Where is the review of why the split to language communities?
What are the benefits?
If this is about shared tools, or better integration of specific
components, then let us isolate the problems, then work to the solution.
Pushing harder on WMF to get components that strengthen our community,
provide a better product, and more resource productve, and are part of
their ultimate plan is worthwhile. Starting with a solution isn't going to
get the best result.
Regards, Billinghurst
On Sat, 1 Jun 2013 20:22:38 -0400, David Cuenca <dacuetu@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Jane, hi Alex,
>
> Yes, I agree with you that a centralized Wikisource would be quite
> meaningful, specially now that projects like Wikidata have shown that it
is
> possible to have both localization and centralization living in harmony.
> I know that Doug (cc'ed) did some experiments with this goal in mind,
but I
> have no idea how far he is now.
> Apart from the technical challenge, it also worries me the social
aspect.
> Wikisourcerors from each Wikisource and have lived in isolation from
each
> other for a long time. How would be a reunification perceived by the
> different communities? Would it be something wanted?
>
> Andrea and me have the pending task of contacting the communities, so
this
> is something that we should bring up among other important topics (like
the
> creation of a Wikisource User Group:
> http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_User_Groups)
>
> The OPW is a grant program for students similar to Google Summer of Code
> focused on helping bring more female contributors to open source
projects.
> https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Outreach_Program_for_Women
> So yes, it is a gendergap project, but we can offer wikisource-related
> projects as we did with GsoC.
>
> David --Micru
>
> PS: Some of those plates are quite scary... I love them :)
>
>
> On Sat, Jun 1, 2013 at 4:12 AM, Jane Darnell <jane023@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi David and Alex,
>> I am also starting to think that one project would be a whole lot
>> simpler, especially given the lack of cross-referencing between
>> projects, which would be nice to have in the wikisource of many
>> popular wikipedia languages - especially for translated texts.
>>
>> Years ago, while researching an urban legend, I took some photographs
>> of the engravings and the table of contents of a Latin book and its
>> Dutch translation a century later. At the time I was toying with the
>> idea of cross referencing the stories but realized quickly there was
>> no way to do this on Wikisource. I put my scans here:
>>
>>
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Observationes_Medicae_by_Nicolaes_Tulp
>>
>> Wouldn't it be easier to have just one Wikisource and have all
>> language-related information reside in interface layers and for the
>> language of texts, the category structure? This would make the Lua
>> interface easier to achieve and work on.
>>
>> David, do you mean by "Outreach Program for Women" to refer to a
>> specific wikisource project other than the general ones we have for
>> the gendergap project?
>>
>> Jane
>>
>> 2013/5/31, Alex Brollo <alex.brollo@gmail.com>:
>> > I agree fully Micru.
>> > Obviously, my dream is something much simpler and clear-cut: a unique
>> > wikisource for all languages, since an unique project for any textual
>> media
>> > is needed IMHO just as a common project for any non-textual media is
>> > running: Commons; and a common project for data now exists: Wikidata.
>> >
>> > And now, let's go to explore Lua a little bit more.... I presume,
that
>> > mw.loaderData() can read a table of Lua functions too, if I
understand
>> Lua
>> > table features. So, shared modules could perhaps be hosted into one
>> > data
>> > module only. Let's try ....
>> >
>> > Alex
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > 2013/5/31 David Cuenca <dacuetu@gmail.com>
>> >
>> >> Hi all,
>> >>
>> >> After a talk with Brad Jorsch during the Hackathon (thanks again
Brad
>> for
>> >> your patience), it became clear to me that Lua modules can be
>> >> localized
>> >> either by using system messages or by getting the project language
>> >> code
>> >> (mw.getContentLanguage().getCode()) and then switching the message.
>> >> This
>> >> second option is less integrated with the translation system, but
can
>> >> serve
>> >> as intermediate step to get things running.
>> >>
>> >> For Wikisource it would be nice to have a central repository
(sitting
>> >> on
>> >> wikisource.org) of localized Lua modules and associated templates.
The
>> >> documentation could be translated using Extension:Translate. These
>> >> modules,
>> >> templates and associated documentation would be then synchronized
with
>> >> all
>> >> the language wikisources that subscribe to an opt-in list. Users
would
>> be
>> >> then advised to modify the central module, thus all language
versions
>> >> would
>> >> benefit of the improvements. This could be the first experiment of
>> having
>> >> a
>> >> centralized repository of modules.
>> >>
>> >> What do you think of this? Would be anyone available to mentor an
>> >> Outreach
>> >> Program for Women project?
>> >>
>> >> Thanks,
>> >> David Cuenca --Micru
>> >>
_______________________________________________
Wikisource-l mailing list
Wikisource-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikisource-l
--
Etiamsi omnes, ego non
_______________________________________________
Wikisource-l mailing list
Wikisource-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikisource-l