Gerard Meijssen wrote:
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.
I do not find this objection compelling. Ultimate Wiktionary is a
database and so whatever information is needed can easily be stored
and/or tracked in the database, and displayed at any point at which it
seems relevant to do so.
*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
I am confident that GNU FDL 2.0 will deal with this problem, but in any
case, it is not an insurmountable problem. Just merge the histories --
there are several ways to do this. If we were going to do it in words,
we would say:
"This article is based on <this Italian article> which has <this
history>, and on <this Dutch article> which has <this history>,
Alternatively, we could say at the start of every history "This article
is based on the original Wiktionary project, and the history for that
project, in total, is <this>".
*When we keep all these histories, who can say it is
"my" work? I
contributed to it ??
Can you be specific about what clause of the license you're thinking about?
*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 ??
I agree with this complaint, but it is not impossible nor particularly
difficult to comply with the license.