Hoi,
To answer some questions...
- when some Wiktionary projects are affected by it, then it is for them
to take or not take the consequences.
- with more content, OmegaWiki will provide a better service to more
languages.
- there has never been an issue with communities, OmegaWiki still has its
own community. It has different rules then Wikimedia projects (we are not
afraid to give admin rights to everyone and we do not regret that)
- When OmegaWiki becomes a WMF project, there will be no split .. why
would it?
- OmegaWiki conforms to what is a wiki. Ward Cunningham says so. The
notion that a project behaves different is normal. Wikibooks, Wiktionary,
Wikipedia, Commons all have their own little differences. The same is true
for OmegaWiki.
Yes I can think of more questions, but the motivation for me is that it will
allow us (ie WMF) to do new things. It will improve the ability of people to
more easily find information, pictures. That is what we aim to do. It is
easy to think up what will divide us, it is harder to see that there is a
benefit when we allow for change.
Thanks,
GerardM
On 19 July 2010 17:54, Lodewijk <lodewijk(a)effeietsanders.org> wrote:
I think it would be best to first discuss the general
question (if) and
later more specific questions (how) like the license. Although important,
it
is more important to determine if we want this in the first place. Once we
know that, we can work out the exact conditions from both sides :)
Questions to consider in the if-question would be:
* How does this influence other projects, both positively and negatively
* Do we believe there can be a stable community supporting this (this has
proven to be problematic in the past)
* Would it be good for OmegaWiki, or would it mean that it would
practically
split up and that two competing projects arise?
* Do we want anything that doesnt work exactly like MediaWiki works in
enwiki (as in, more database-like), is that a nogo?
Probably you can imagine more questions like this.
Lodewijk
2010/7/19 Gerard Meijssen <gerard.meijssen(a)gmail.com>
Hoi,
OmegaWiki is truly multi lingual in that depending on the amount of
content
available in a language labels and annotations
will show up in the
preferred
language. Recently many of the relevant phrases were localised in Telugu
and
consequently it became useful in Telugu.
When a language is right to left the user interface and the data is shown
in
the right to left direction.
One or the more interesting things of OmegaWiki is that we do have links
to
Commons and Wikipedia. This means that when you
look for pictures of a
"hobune" you will actually find them. Having links to Wikipedia means
that
they can effectively work as interwiki links.
To understand why we at OmegaWiki want the WMF to adopt this project, we
have always wanted OmegaWiki to be a WMF project. As far as the
suggestion
goes to end the Wiktionary projects, we have
always said that this is for
the Wiktionary projects themselves to decide. However particularly for
the
smaller projects the effort of adding content to
OmegaWiki is more
efficient
as more people benefit from work that only needs to be done once.
As OmegaWiki has its data in a database, it is possible to use the data
in
applications. This is very much our goal ... we
are on record saying
"success is when people find an application for our data we did not think
off."
As to the license, PD would be our preferred license but sadly their are
too
many people who consider that their must be a license because ... In our
view making our data available under a license prevents success. This is
a
reason why we are not interested in
"copyright violations".
Thanks,
GerardM
On 19 July 2010 09:05, Milos Rancic <millosh(a)gmail.com> wrote:
(Just poking foundation-l, please continue with
discussion at
wiktionary-l, or, better, at Meta [1])
During Wikimania I asked Gerard Meijssen would he be willing to give
OmegaWiki to Wikimedia. He said that he doesn't have anything against
it: software is free, content is free. More precisely, he told to me
"Take it!" :)
My initial idea was that it would be the best to replace all
Wiktionaries with OmegaWiki. However, the last day of Wikimania I was
talking with one Swedish guy who is working on Swedish Wiktionary. He
has complained that philologists like more open form for writing
dictionary. Thus, my suggestion is to adopt OmegaWiki as one of
Wiktionaries, probably as
http://wiktionary.org/, similarly to the
multilingual Wikisource.
And, of course, before possible adoption we need discussion and some
software improvements of Wikidata extension.
[1] -
* * *
As multilingual projects are not in the scope of the [[Language
committee]], before the implementation (or not) of the idea, community
should discuss about it.
[
http://www.omegawiki.org/ OmegaWiki] is a formal multilingual
dictionary based on MediaWiki extension
[[:mw:Extension:Wikidata|Wikidata]].
No matter would it be the only Wiktionary or it would be just one of
the Wiktionaries, OmegaWiki would raise quality of Wiktionaries. At
the other side, the project would get much more attention as a
Wikimedia project.
Wikidata extension should be improved (from user experience and
linguistic points of view) before implementation as Wikimedia project.
[[User:GerardM|Gerard Meijssen]], the founder of OmegaWiki project,
doesn't have anything against adopting it as a Wikimedia project.
== Advantages and disadvantages of adopting OmegaWiki ==
=== Advantages ===
* It is possible to create one billion entries per Wiktionary: All
synthetic languages could import at least ~10M of words, but probably
more if all common phrases are counted. Thus, it means that we need
just 100 synthetic or polysynthetic languages to create one billion
entries per Wiktionary. This is very large number and while it is
possible to keep technically one such project, presently it is hardly
possible to keep a number of projects with more than billion of
entries.
* It is structured formally.
* ...
=== Disadvantages ===
* Philologists like more open form for dictionaries.
* OmegaWiki is distant from the wiki principle. Software fixes should
make it closer.
* ...
== How to adopt OmegaWiki ==
* Instead of all Wiktionaries.
* As
www.wiktionary.org, like
www.wikisource.org is the place for
multilingual Wikisource.
* As
mul.wiktionary.org (ISO 639-5 code for multilingual entities)
* ...?
== Minimums for adopting OmegaWiki ==
=== If OmegaWiki replaces all Wiktionaries ===
* Evaluation of software by linguists and adding necessary linguistic
features.
* Fixing bugs in software if needed.
* Adding all needed features to satisfy philological needs.
* Importing all data from Wiktionaries.
=== If OmegaWiki becomes one of the Wiktionaries ===
* Evaluation of software by linguists and adding necessary linguistic
features.
* Fixing bugs in software if needed.
== Licensing ==
OmegaWiki licences are CC-BY and GFDL. It is a bit of pleonasm, as
CC-BY is a subset of GFDL (and CC-BY-SA as well).
* Licensing should probably stay CC-BY, not CC-BY-SA. There is a legal
problem of copyrighting words, phrases, sentences and definitions,
which mean that it would be probably better to leave the least
restrictive license as the OmegaWiki license.
* ...
[[Category:Requests for comments]]
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l