On Oct 30, 2007 2:47 AM, Steve Bennett <stevagewp(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Ok. Having said that I'm off on holidays for the
next week, maybe
someone else can start the process?
Drop a note at the village pump, maybe centralised discussion and somewhere
else? Plus an explicit message here...
Sounds good.
Presumably something like {{author:...}} along the
lines of
{{defaultsort:...}} ? Then
you're saying we just update the relevant template to markup that field
specially. Cool. We're assuming that raw text is a good enough
representation for authorship...maybe it would be better to be more explicit
like "attributiontext" or "authorname" or something, to leave open
the
possibility for more details later on like contact information etc.
Yes.
Not sure. For some reason the Commons people are
openly hostile to the
idea of a mass import of free media to
Commons.
AFAIK only because of things like Category:GFDL_Presumed and other
mostly rubbish stuff.
And in any case the attribution mechanism will be
useful for fair
use images. I suggest we leave
this as a problem for en people to solve in their own time - as long as the
mechanism works, they can get around to rolling it out whenever they want.
Fair enough.
This is an
utterly trivial software change (on the order of a few
minutes) after the data is extracted and available in the database.
A MediaWiki software change? Also when you say "utterly trivial" do you mean
that you can yourself
perform it and get it committed? Out of curiosity, what's the normal lead
time from a new feature going into
the repository, and it appearing at en.wp ?
I can perform it and commit it myself. Lead time 'depends'. If there
are changes in SVN which require a database schema change we'll lag
further behind SVN. Right now we're about 3.5 weeks behind SVN.
The bigger issue here is that this feature would depend on the
metadata magic word stuff above which is a bigger change which will
likely require a schema change.