On 2012-08-06 15:16, Dovi Jacobs wrote:
Even if many people at English Wikisource are not currently preoccupied with issues 1&2, wouldn't it be healthy to broaden horizons? Imagine Wikisource creating a modern version of the Loeb Classical Library based on collaborative work... It's wonderful to transcribe Mark Twain or the 1911 Britannica from scanned editions, but the full power and possibilities of the Wiki platform are so much more than that!
Nothing stops you from editing a classical library, but it is a different activity than scanning and proofreading. It is similar to creating your own free translations of classical works, in the sense that it combines the reproduction of an existing book with your own creative/intellectual input. It borders on being a Wikibooks activity rather than a Wikisource activity.
I personally think that simple scanning and proofreading is the activity where we can most easily grow Wikisource. Since the job is mostly non-intellectual, many people can be instructed to help, without creating edit wars. The progress is linear to the number of pages. To scan and proofread 15 volumes of the collected works by an author takes 15 times more man-hours than a single book. Translation or scholarly editing requires more coordination and takes more time for a larger work than the sum of the parts.
Does anyone understand whether the years of discussion of "Wikidata" might have anything to do with #1-2?
I'm afraid that Wikidata can function as a honey-trap. As an abstract idea, it can be perceived as a solution to any problem, but it would take an unspecified number of years to get there. As a concrete software development project during 2012, it will address interwiki (interlanguage) links and nothing more. By honey-trap I mean that if you think Wikidata can solve your problem, you will be trapped waiting for that to happen, while years pass by that you could have used better.