[Foundation-l] [Commons-l] Wikipedia Invites Users to Take Part in Open, Collaborative Video Experiment

[Gerard Meijssen]

Hoi,
For your information, MetaVid is supported for its localisation by BetaWiki.

Thanks,
     GerardM

On Jan 19, 2008 9:50 PM, Gregory Maxwell <gmaxwell at gmail.com> wrote:

> On Jan 19, 2008 2:13 AM, Erik Moeller <erik at wikimedia.org> wrote:
> > As has been pointed out many times, there is no exclusivity here.
>
> Okay, then I'll be looking forward to an nearly infinite number of
> partnerships with well aligned open projects.
>
> > Just
> > last December, Sue & I allocated a substantial piece of our
> > Wikiversity presentation time at Stanford to let Michael Dale talk
> > about MetaVid;
> > we're hosting it in our SVN repository, and I've also
>
> My understanding is that Michael Dale was told that Wikimedia would be
> using Kaltura and that it might consider metavid some day 'in the
> future'. Perhaps I misunderstood, but this is also appears to be what
> was claimed in the presentation you gave to Sun Microsystems, and it
> was consistent with the press release that Kaltura was circulating
> when I heard this.
>
> The SVN hosting (which started a few weeks ago) is, as I understand
> it, a direct results of Kaltura-related complaints that WMF is
> ignoring requests for help from open projects.
>
> I'd ask Michael to respond directly,  but I expect he is in Australia
> for FOMS (Foundations of Open Media Software,
> http://www.annodex.org/events/foms2008/pmwiki.php/Main/CFP).
>
> Many months ago I asked if I could travel to Australia (on my own
> dime, none the less) to attend FOMS for Wikimedia.  That, today, WMF
> has no one there speaks volumes to WMF's actual commitment to open
> media.
>
> Talk is cheap.
>
> [snip]
> > the project in other reasonable ways. It's not mature enough for real
> > world deployment on WMF sites; nor is Kaltura.
>
> Correct. Yet WMF is putting our press releases and calling for
> community help with one and not the other. And it's not just Metavid
> vs Kaltura, there are dozens of open media projects which we are not
> supporting but could and should be.
>
> There are even quite a few open source flash video editors, if there
> was a reason to go the flash route, and we were approached years ago
> by the authors of a commercial Java video editor that wanted to work
> with us.  Unlike Kaltura (and metavid), many of these other parties
> have mature technology.
>
> [snip]
> > I'm not going to argue with you about the technical merits of either
> > approach. There's no point in doing so: I am happy to let the open
> > source ecosystem compete for the most viable solution.
>
> At least you've given me the respect of letting me know that I should
> not expect an answer from you on those questions.
>
> [snip]
> > We're quite transparent about what Kaltura is and what it isn't.
>
> I don't agree here. The press release says open about a zillion times,
> but the existing level of openness is not especially high. I think it
> is misleading, and so do a number of outside parties who have a high
> degree of expertise in web media.  I suppose this is a disagreement
> which we are not going to be able to resolve.
>
> > The Wikimedia Foundation is not an isolationist organization. We don't
> > want to be an island -- we want to be the ocean.
>
> That sounds nice, but I'm not sure what it means. I can guess, I suppose.
>
> Being all things to all people is worthless if you are nothing to
> yourself. The world does not need another ocean, but it does need a
> collection of uncompromisingly free knowledge. Not because compromises
> are evil, but because we already have a wealth of compromised options
> to choose from!
>
> I think that most of the community would be sad to see Wikimedia
> abandoning the things that make it special and distinct from competing
> information sources..  Even though doing so might speed our growth and
> allow us to blanket the world, I think many would consider that a
> hollow victory.
>
> The Foundation has a specific mission which can only be hurt by
> adopting proprietary formats. Apparently, you don't agree but you are
> unwilling to engage in discussion on this matter. While this continues
> a long standing pattern of failing to address these issues, there
> isn't much left for me to say in the absence of a counter argument.
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>