-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
phoebe ayers:
River: Well, you say that part of the issue with the
toolserver is money and
time... and this person that I've been talking to is offering to throw money
and time at the problem. So, what can they constructively do?
i think this is being discussed privately now...
I see a difference in the type of information a
researcher might want to pull
(public data, large sets of related page information, full-text mining, ??)
and the types of tools that the current toolserver mainly supports (editcount
tools, catscan, etc).
so, what is missing from the current toolserver that prevents researchers from
working with large data sets?
I also see a difference in how the two groups might be
authenticated --
there's a difference between being a trusted Wikipedian or trusted Wikimedia
developer and being a trusted technically-competent researcher
i don't see why access to the toolserver would be restricted to Wikipedia
editors. in fact, i'd be happier giving access to a recognised academic expert
than some random guy on Wikipedia.
- river.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (HP-UX)
iEYEARECAAYFAkm2zSQACgkQIXd7fCuc5vKYSACdF2IJwcfhWEarjgDC8FmMSls1
NN0An2jLSu3/mhLCEAsLuoZz0x3DE8mP
=ZHMA
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----