"Rolf Lampa" <rolf.lampa(a)rilnet.com> wrote in
message news:fftcic$ebu$1@ger.gmane.org...
Jay R. Ashworth skrev:
On Fri, Oct 26, 2007 at 01:29:45PM +0200, Rolf
Lampa wrote:
We really are talking about aliases: also known as --
"Also known as" is a Synonym (in the context of an article title).
Other uses of a broad alias concept would NOT add value, which is my
point.
different spellings (usually) for the same words.
Different spellings should not, in general, be dealt with manually
(like it is dealt with now, using Redirects), since it can be automated.
At least,
in the pattern-driven examples I've seen mentioned upthread.
Yes, more ideas exist about what kind of information to define as
Aliases, but some of those ideas really isn't a good idea at all, in
that they'd intend to manually define what's already in the text -
namely the text. That part, presenting keywords from the text, should
be handled by smart indexers and stemmers. As usual.
Let's be honest here. To users of Wikipedia, the name you choose will not
make any difference. If there is a percieved problem and a feature exists
that solves that problem, then it will be used to solve that problem -
even
if it is not what the feature was intended for.
For example, I very much doubt that redirect pages would exist if page
transclusion had been invented first.
If our search indexing is good enough to deal with sound-alikes then
great,
but if not (as is currently the case), then
redirects/synonyms/aliases/whatever you call it, will be used to make
these
redirects manually (as is currently the case, and as will continue to be
the
case if the new feature is added first, whichever name you choose).
- Mark Clements (HappyDog)
_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org