Brion Vibber wrote:
The gap between my thinking and Gerard's thinking appears to be that
Gerard considers redirects to be canonincal content; thus having a
"wrong spelling" in a URL somehow implies that this is a "correct"
spelling, which is therefore wrong and should be removed.
On the other hand, your thinking is based on the assumption that without
redirects, the URLs that people currently link to will stop working.
This in turn is assuming that the Ultimate Wiktionary will replace the
existing Wiktionaries at their current URLs, which according to my
understanding of the plan isn't going to happen. Gerard said that UW
will at first exist alongisde the existing Wiktionaries, and he also
said that if the community will be in favour of keeping the existing
Wiktionaries in operation indefinitely, then so be it.
Therefore, Ultimate Wiktionary is not going to be at
en.wiktionary.org.
Once we decide to scrap the old Wiktionaries, we can therefore easily
have a RewriteRule to forward from capitalised [
langcode].wiktionary.org
to
ultimate.wiktionary.org or whatever it will be (I would prefer just
wiktionary.org).
However, this is not saying that I disagree with you, Brion; in fact, I
quite agree that redirects should continue to exist, though for other
reasons than yours. I don't see any point in having separate entries for
"goes" and "went", or for "color" and "colour".
This would be a
tremendous undertaking for languages that are heavily inflected
(
http://verbix.com/webverbix/cache/31.etmek.html), and its usefulness to
the reader is highly doubtful. At the same time, however, there is a
need for disambiguation pages: If I browse to a word which exists in two
languages, and in both languages it is an inflected form of another
word, I need to be asked which of those words I meant.
Timwi