Wiktionary-l June 2005

wiktionary-l@lists.wikimedia.org

19 participants
27 discussions

(no subject)
by Aphaia 18 Jun '05

18 Jun '05

Hi all, Japanese Wiktionary has been unlocked since Monday, June 12, just after four months locking period to restart. After re-launching, over 60 new articles have been submitted and some were speedily deleted ;-) Thank you for your help, encouragement and understanding during our hardest days and your help and cooperation for re-launching project will be appreciated as well as former ones. Valeto, -- Aphaea(a)*.wikipedia.org email: Aphaia @ gmail (dot) com

1 0

Fwd: [Wikipedia-l] Wiktionary www page
by Yann Forget 07 Jun '05

07 Jun '05

Hi, Congratulations ! BTW, this should be sent to the Wiktionary list. I updated the portal and the statistics. Subject: [Wikipedia-l] Wiktionary www page Date: Wednesday 18 May 2005 07:20 From: "James R. Johnson" To: wikipedia-l(a)wikimedia.org Hello, I just wanted to inform the list that the Anglo-Saxon wiktionary has over 100 entries! Later, James -- http://www.non-violence.org/ | Site collaboratif sur la non-violence http://www.forget-me.net/ | Alternatives sur le Net http://fr.wikipedia.org/ | Encyclopédie libre http://www.forget-me.net/pro/ | Formations et services Linux

4 4

GNU-FDL and Ultimate Wiktionary
by Jimmy Wales 06 Jun '05

06 Jun '05

I think that GNU FDL is perfectly fine for Ultimate Wiktionary and there is no need to change the license. The license is perfectly compatible with the .DICT format, so there should be no problems at all. Thinking about how to import data from wiktionary in the ultimate wiktionary may pose a few puzzles with respect to FDL compliance, but I don't see any significant problems. The import script should keep track of who contributed to a chunk of data and take note of that fact. The history may be a little more problematic, and I think we will want to get advice on exactly how to do it. But changing the license to something else would require throwing away all existing work in wiktionary, which seems quite unwise to me. --Jimbo

8 18

Re: [Foundation-l] A license for the Ultimate Wiktionary
by Gerard Meijssen 04 Jun '05

04 Jun '05

Milos Rancic wrote: >(To correct myself...) > >I think that there is no need to avoid GNU FDL terms. Just put >gzipped/bzip2ed history inside of package and in all of articles >put reference (that contribution history can be found in that file). > > Hoi, Apparantly you do not understand that there are several issues that make the GNU-FDL not practical. *Wiktionary data cannot be imported properly into Ultimate Wiktionary. UW has no room for gzipped or bzipped history. It is a server side database and nobody is going to see the information in this way. *Ultimate Wiktionary will import data from many Wiktionaries, the first one could be the nl:wiktionary. Many articles have been copied to and from the it:wiktionary. Suppose an article is shared, it arrived first from the nl:wikipedia so that one rules.. right ? Now what history should we have with the article ?? From a GNU-FDL point of view it is unforseen, crazy. *When we keep all these histories, who can say it is "my" work? I contributed to it ?? *When we export content to the .dict or RFC 2229 format, this is a subset of the data that we have on a word, a concept. We have the UW history and all these Wiktionary histories. Histories for each word. Histories for possibly a file with a few fields like: "Word" "Description" "Translation" "Original source". The amount of bagage that we should carry according to the GNU-FDL is unforseen and crazy. It just does not make sense. It is also data that has no stucture. Who will ever look at it ?? My conclusion is that the current GNU-FDL does not funtion for atomic information like we will have in Ultimate Wiktionary. When it prevents the implementation of new use for the data that we have, it becomes a hindrance. The goal of the Wikimedia Foundation is to make Free information available. When a license like the GNU-FDL only allows for server side information that has a static structure, I am sure that even Richard Stallman will find the arguments to ammend the GNU-FDL compelling. One crucial thing in all this is that Free information should stay Free and be accessible. The current Wiktionary data is as closed as any proprietary datacollection. This is because of its lack of structure. It cannot be used for anything but server side information. Ultimate Wiktionary intends to combine the strength of the information that we have in all our wiktionaries, it will be structured. It does allow accessibility and new innovative uses. By being Free, accessible and innovative, we will gain a much wider public, these will not only be users of our data but also providers of data. This is what we aim for. In the current nl:wiktionary we have people and organisations like FrankC and www.ziekenhuis.nl who contributed big time to the content of Wiktionary. We do need to recognise their contributions. They donated important body of works but we also have people like MARCEL and S.V.E.T who added content on a regular basis, it is important that we recognise their hard work and their contributions. They make and made it the success it is. So if anything, we should find a way to honour the members of our Wiktionary community as we move forward to an Ultimate Wiktionary. Thanks, GerardM

3 2

(no subject)
by rb_wiktionary＠boult.mailshell.com 03 Jun '05

03 Jun '05

>>>> I guess "old-school" is probably a good term. I have very little involvement on the technical side of things. I do find it a chore to insert a picture or a table, but I figure it out when I have to. When templates appear in an article that I am editing, I need to make extra effort just to track where some of them come from or what they mean. If I, as a person who has been here for over three years, am having trouble with this, it must be worse for a non-technical person who just wants to indulge his love of words. I too am alarmed at the proposal, as much as I have seen it. I am technical(well, used to be) 28 years in the computer industry, starting at the most technical levels of system programming, but over the years migrating to the role of helping general business users get the best out of systems, as business analyst, system designer, project manager. One thing I learned was - never let a technician design a system. It will be great for the technician's personal uses, but a huge chance it will be useless to the general users. Like Ec I find even the present level of codification annoyingly complicated. Requiring any significant level of codification from general users would just knock out 99%of the population form being contributors, asituation we cannot go towards. >From what little I have learned so far of this idea, including the complete lack of communication with the user community, the idea of introducing a new more technical Ultimate Wiktionary sounds like a disaster waiting to happen. Richardb rb_wiktionary(a)boult.mailshell.com This mail message is not intended to receive a reply to the address used to send it. The address used for sending it will not accept replies. The content may reveal an address you can use.

5 5

Re: Wiktionary, UW
by Gerard Meijssen 02 Jun '05

02 Jun '05

Gustav Vella wrote: >Hi Erik and Gerard, > >ok the current documentation : >On 5/30/05, Erik Moeller <erik_moeller(a)gmx.de> wrote: > > >>http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikidata/Notes >> >> > >has emphasis on the wikidata concept, which was briefly introduced to >me by Magnus. > > > >>2) developing and testing the best possible schema for Ultimate Wiktionary. >> >> >seems to be the last point on your roadmap but have you any >documentation on a UW schema draft so far? I cant find anything. I'd >be particularly interest to know >- Where do you cut an interface between language universal and >language specific schemacomponents? >-- are there any guidlines for the language specific schema components? >- Are you working on basis of the EAGLES standard ? >- How are you handling eqivalence lists >- how are you handling semantic fields (fixed categories? vs keyword bag?) > > >- is there some place other than the mailing list to contribute to the >schema design? somewhere on metawiki? > >and finally what are your first opinions on the schema? everything >clear? does it fit into your concepts? Do you want me to translate the >documentation? > >Best regards from Cologne > >Gustav > Hoi Gustav, At this moment we have not identified for ourselves many language specific components. What we have identified is that a meaning and an etymology are language dependent. I have explicitly NOT published any schema that I could come up with because I find that it is much better to have many schema's and discuss what is needed and why. So far it has proven me right. The first schema of Ultimate Wiktionary mark 1 may be lacking in some respects. But the idea with UW is to have a base scheme, get acquainted with what we do and ammend it. The base will be base and open for improvements. The idea is to change the scheme on a regular basis based on the experience that we gain and based on the functionality that we want. At this moment in time we are building up to the moment where we DO start talking schema's in earnest. So if you have proposals as to an EAGLES standard the handling of equivalence lists semantic fields this is the time to propose. Please publish on META and use the category "Wiktionary" Thanks, GerardM

1 0

(no subject)
by rb_wiktionary＠boult.mailshell.com 01 Jun '05

01 Jun '05

>>>Are there objections from old-school wiktionarians to the ultimate wiktionary plans? Is it possible that we could address these objections through code? I've been an active administrator on Wiktionary for some months now. But only recently subscribed to the mailing list - only just noticing that such a thing exists. So this discussion of the Ultimate Wiktionary comes as a complete surprise to me. Which is even more alarming as somewhere in Wiki-.org land there is clearly a policy that all changes etc must be notified and approved through the web site. The mailing list is only an ancillary means of communication. So I would suggest whoever is managing the idea of change needs to lift their game in keeping the active Wiktionary community informed. Richardb rb_wiktionary(a)boult.mailshell.com This mail message is not intended to receive a reply to the address used to send it. The address used for sending it will not accept replies. The content may reveal an address you can use.

4 3

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

Wiktionary-l June 2005