2017-04-11 16:36 GMT+02:00 ankry.wiki <ankry.wiki@onet.pl>:

W dniu 2017-04-11 14:06:02 użytkownik Nicolas VIGNERON <vigneron.nicolas@gmail.com> napisał:

> 2017-04-11 13:17 GMT+02:00 David Starner <prosfilaes@gmail.com>:
> >
> > On Tue, Apr 11, 2017 at 2:46 AM ankry.wiki <ankry.wiki@onet.pl> wrote:
> >>
> >> I doubt we can find 1000 works with PD translations into each Wikisource
> >> language, including Latin and Sanskrit.
> >> It would be hard to find 10. Mostly ancient.
> >>
> >> Unlike Wikipedia, we present content that has already been created by somebody.
> >> We are not creating that ourselves.
> >> (except few ws accepting Wikisource translations)
> >
> > How many Wikisources don't accept user translations? I'd guess that at least
> > half of them do.
>
> Good question. We should store clearly this information somewhere (on
> https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q19335648 and local pages ?).

We do:
https://wikisource.org/wiki/Wikisource:Subdomain_coordination
At least 4 do not allow translations.

> > It may not be universal, but you'll never know how many of those works
> actually have PD translations until you actually search for them. A list can
> at least provoke the search.
>
> Exactly.
> I can easily find to 10 works in most languages of the planet (The Bible, the
> Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Shakespeare, Conan Doyle, Dickens, Stevenson,
> Verne, some important international treaty and publication from the Vatican ;
> it's already a lot more than 10 works available in more than 100 languages)

most != all (Most Wikisource should have... != All Wikisource should have...)

True but should != must ; for me here, it's a suggestion, not an obligation (either way, nothing can really be obligated on a wiki ;) ).

> Speaking of the UN, the UNESCO created the Index Translationum
> ( http://www.unesco.org/xtrans/bsstatlist.aspx ) that can be helpful here.
> Cdlt, ~nicolas

> PS: Latin or Sanskrit are not the thoughest challenges, try Breton or Venetian
> :P (by the way, the UDHR exist in these 4 languages and 500 more ;) only the
> Bible has more translations).

I have intentionally chosen dead languages to point out that "all" should not
be the goal.

Latin and Sanskrit are not entirely dead and are much more active than most languages of the planet (more than Breton or Venitian).

I"m not sure, we have the same understanding of « goal », for me it's a direction, something we should tend toward too, not an obligation that have to be met.

Concerning, UDHR, we have unclear copyright status even for Polish translation:
it is not considered to be an official legal act, no "official" translation;
translated by a Foundation which say nothing about copyright. And even,
translations of foreign legal acts are considered copyrighted in Poland
(according to opinions we have).

Uh... strange... I thought UN documents were in public domain (not all of them but clearly official documents like the UDHR, and that's why we have https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Template:PD-UN-doc ).

And http://www.ohchr.org/EN/AboutUs/Pages/Copyright.aspx seems quite explicit to me.

Translation copyright problems may exist for many translations of Conan Doyle,
Dickens, Stevenson or Verne.
I also doubt we will get a Wikisource translation of "The Posthumous Papers of the
Pickwick Club" into eg. Lithuanian (while ltwikisource seems to be like
a single-user project - at least recently).

Sure, but this is clearly not the work I had in mind ;)

We can talk about 1000-100 "base" works in, maybe, 5-10 most active Wikisources.

Exactly! Let's go! Where can we store this? (beside Wikidata of course)

Cdlt, ~nicolas