Peter Gervai wrote:
On Tue, Jun 22, 2004 at 08:22:01AM -0700, Ray Saintonge wrote:
Peter Gervai wrote:
If they're lazy or uneducated to install a player they probably won't miss much since Wikipedia content is not multimedia oriented, and this may be a drive to them to educate themselves and install the players.
That's a damned arrogant attitude. In some parts of the world people would count themselves lucky just to have text available on a slow connection. I support the vision of making information available in these places, so a lot of this fancy stuff needs to be severable.
I think you missed my other sentence below that. :-)
It mentioned that apart from those (people who use hardware fit to show video ought to be driven to use free codecs [too]) multimedia *is not*, and *should not* be considered important (or even significant) part of Wikipedia, which is an encyclopedia and targeting textual information representation. I guess this shows that I support fully the "viewable by any browser" approach and saves me from being a damned arrogant person. :-)
My opinion could be summarised that "we should concentrate on text, but when we use graphical, sound, movie or other media files we should use and support free formats if they're available".
Sorry if my response was too strong, and thanks for the clarification.
Ec