Consider too the possibility of using a "pseudo-namespace", while testing
the stuff it source used a prefix "Opera": for ns0 pages devoided to
"works" with few drawback (and the big advantage to make things clear)
Alex
2017-11-02 10:30 GMT+01:00 Sam Wilson <sam(a)samwilson.id.au>au>:
I must admit, I'm not a huge fan of multiple
namespaces in wikis. They're
mostly not necessary! :-) (Don't worry, I'm not suggesting getting rid of
any either.)
And certainly, from the point of view of integrating Wikidata and moving
towards better metadata and searchability, I don't think we need all
Wikisources to unify on any particular set of namespaces. I think any
future metadata system must just work with all the different current
set-ups (and I think it can, quite well).
—Sam.
On Thu, 2 Nov 2017, at 05:21 PM, Anika Born wrote:
Billinghurst,
That might work for me, with a Login.
But does this also work for random readers, who don't have a login? Who
don't know, that there are preferences (and especially what can be done
with them?)
But more important: please don't (just) focus in namespaces for every
Wikisource-Project. You might loose at least de.WS. I can't see changing
something, that works fine for this project... Especially not to change a
system, that is quite different, from what they have now. That is all I am
asking for. de.ws is working with templates to differ, not with
namespaces.
for instance Johann Wolfgang von Goethe:
<https://de.wikisource.org/wiki/Johann_Wolfgang_von_Goethe#Bibliographien>
Goethe was an author, but there are also works about Goethe. In de.ws
portal-page and author-page about Geothe are merged in one. There is no
difference. Don't expect something else.
Best, Anika
2017-11-02 9:07 GMT+01:00 billinghurst <billinghurstwiki(a)gmail.com>om>:
Anika,
That is matter long resolved in my opinion with the change in the default
search namespaces that the communities made, and similarly with our
redefining content namespaces. While main namespace will always take
preference to the other nss in results, they show up pretty quickly where
you have an intitle: match.
At enWS I would say that we lost more searches to subpages, so with the
ability to change your search preferences with subphrase matches, much of
that is addressed (though it is not the default search configuration at
this point).
The completion suggester
<https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Special:MyLanguage/Extension:CirrusSearch/CompletionSuggester>
is an algorithm for search suggestions with better typo correction and
search relevance.
Default (recommended)
Corrects up to two typos. Resolves close redirects.
Subphrase matching (recommended for longer page titles)
Corrects up to two typos. Resolves close redirects. Matches subphrase in
titles.
Strict mode (advanced)
No typo correction. No accent folding. Strict matching.
Redirect mode (advanced)
No typo correction. Resolves close redirects.
Redirect mode with subphrase matching (advanced)
No typo correction. Resolves close redirects. Matches subphrase in titles.
Regards, Billinghurst
------ Original Message ------
From: "Anika Born" <WikiAnika(a)wikipedia.de>
To: "discussion list for Wikisource, the free library" <
wikisource-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org>
Sent: 2/11/2017 6:37:29 PM
Subject: Re: [Wikisource-l] wikisource "work" pages or "multiple
editions"
pages
2017-11-01 16:40 GMT+01:00 Nicolas VIGNERON <vigneron.nicolas(a)gmail.com>om>:
From afar, the Opera: pages on it.ws are very close to the pages with the
template {{Éditions}} on fr.ws or the template {{Versions}} on en.ws (and
similar system elsewhere).
The main difference is having a separate namespace A second major
difference is that the templates on fr.ws and en.ws are very light while
the {{Opera}} template took data from Wikidata (but that's an independent
problem, it's possible to change the {{Éditions}} or {{Versions}} templates
to do exactly the same thing without having a specific namespace).
I'm almost convinced too, but in order to create a new namespace on a
project you have to convinced the local community. That's why I'm still
playing the Devil's advocate role and want to learn about the inconvenients
of this system
A reason why there are no different namespaces for work-, edition-,
author-, list- and other portal pages in de.ws is the ws-search. When you
are looking for "Goethe" in the (simple) search (as readers may do) on WS,
you might get to
*
https://de.wikisource.org/wiki/Tafellied,_zu_Goethe%E2%80%
99s_Geburtstage but not to
*
https://de.wikisource.org/wiki/Johann_Wolfgang_von_Goethe
<https://de.wikisource.org/wiki/Johann_Wolfgang_von_Goethe#Bibliographien>
with all the interesting stuff, if that page was in another namespace...
So there was the desition to use templates (and categories) for these
different kind of pages:
https://de.wikisource.org/wiki
/Wikisource:Seiten_zu_Autoren,_Texten,_Themen,_Listen
<https://de.wikisource.org/wiki/Wikisource:Seiten_zu_Autoren,_Texten,_Themen,_Listen>
I think German Wikisource Community won't give this up and switch to using
multiple namespaces (besides Wikisource: and Page:namespace).
Best
Anika
_______________________________________________
Wikisource-l mailing list
Wikisource-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikisource-l
*_______________________________________________*
Wikisource-l mailing list
Wikisource-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikisource-l
_______________________________________________
Wikisource-l mailing list
Wikisource-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikisource-l