Rogol, a good start into 2017! I have difficulties understanding your
question, especially why you are asking it now. This topic was discussed
quite often and for a long time to justify putting money behind talking at
least imo.
you are unhappy a restricted grant was received without community consensus
on commons to have such a technology included? Or you are unhappy that WMF
builds up a Wikidata team when wikimedia Deutschland has already one? You
are unhappy that WMF cuts the money for WMDE and at the same time increases
spending in the same area of technology? Or you are unhappy that there will
be another technical lead while at WMDE there is a lot of experience which
you consider waste and unnecessary bureaucracy? Or you want to discuss how
it will be implemented? Or, to put it in other words, what input would you
give or expect if a document like you are requesting would exist?
Best Rupert
On Jan 10, 2017 11:28 PM, "Rogol Domedonfors" <domedonfors(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
Dear Wes
Thank you for yet another prompt response. It seems almost churlish to say
that unfortunately that is not what I have been asking for -- I must be
very bad at expressing myself to have given so many different people so
many different mistaken impressions of my request. To me a product roadmap
would be a quite high-level view of the new products and major deveopments
and their linkages looking out on a time scale significantly in excess of a
single year, and at a level of detail significantly less than the
aggregation of all the teams' quarterly plans. The roadmap would have the
level of abstraction, interconnection and timscale that allows you to say
that a three-year project such as the one you have just announced will
expedite features on your roadmap and that the grant enabled accelerating
the already started work on Structured Commons into a quicker three-year
time frame: so a roadmap on which you can locate a project with a time
frame that was previously beyond three years let alone one. It is also
known that there are long-term projects such as parser unification, new
editors and discussion systems which look out well beyond the current
year. Are there others -- we do not (yet) know.
So again, my request is that you share this higher-level, longer-term, if
not completely definitve roadmap with the community in the interests of
transparency not only as an abstract objective but in order to maximise
the benefits of early engagement, discussion and co-creation.
Yours
"Rogol"
On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 9:29 PM, Wes Moran <wmoran(a)wikimedia.org> wrote:
Hello Rogol,
Thanks for the question. The Annual Plan we follow and share with the
community for review before we begin our work is available on Meta [1]. We
update specific plans on a quarterly basis on our goals pages [2] as they
may evolve over the year. We also provide a number of links for the
specific teams on our Product page and welcome participation, discussion
or
connection through those pathways and directly with
the feature teams [3].
Specifically the Wikidata, Community Tech, Editing and Discovery teams
have
specific objectives and goals in this years annual
plan.
Hope this answers your question and certainly engage in the ongoing
discussion around the work on the Commons page [4].
Thanks,
Wes
Wes Moran
Vice President of Product
Wikimedia Foundation
[1]
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_
Annual_Plan/2016-2017/Final#Product
[2]
https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Engineering/2016-17_Goals
[3]
https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Product
[4]
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Structured_data/Overview
On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 11:01 AM, Rogol Domedonfors <domedonfors(a)gmail.com
wrote:
Thanks to both Lydia and Denny for these further
replies. I assume that
the WMF has a clear stable and unified view of where it is taking its
various products and the dependencies, which is what I understand by the
phrase product roadmap. "A single document" would be nice, but whatever
it
> is, I am asking for it to be shared with the community.
> "Rogol"
> On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 6:12 PM,
Denny Vrandečić <vrandecic(a)gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > Hi Rogol,
>
> > that is why I pointed you
to the links in that document, which go all
the
> > way back to 2004 discussions of such a project, and further
discussions
over the years. These pretty much establish for me
that this item has
been
> a topic for commons for more than a decade now. But it seems I am
> misunderstanding you, and you are not looking for a documentation of
the
> > shared understanding of the roadmap for Commons and other Wikimedia
> > products, but for a singular Foundation-written document that fixes
the
Wikimedia product roadmap over several years instead?
Cheers,
Denny
On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 10:00 AM Rogol Domedonfors <
domedonfors(a)gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Denny
> >
> > Thank you but the link you provide appears to be to be "Our
high-level
roadmap for developing the project", namely the
Structured Data in
Commons
> project. Since Lisa wrote "Structured Data on Commons was in our
product
> > roadmap" I was referring to the product roadmap on which the
Structured
> > Data in Commons project is included --
that is, I was asking for a
> pointer
> > to the roadmap for "features both on the Wikidata development
roadmap,
> and
> > in other products supported by the Wikimedia Foundation" referred to
in
> Wes
> > Moran's initial post on this topic:
> >
> > But I appreciate the speed of your reply.
> >
> > "Rogol"
> >
> > On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 5:46 PM, Denny Vrandečić <
vrandecic(a)gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Rogol,
> > >
> > > this was the link previously provided on this project:
> > >
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Structured_data/
Overview
> > > > including
> > > > links to previous documents.
> > > >
> > > > Cheers,
> > > > Denny
> > > >
> > > >>