[Foundation-l] Five main authors myth

• Previous message: [Foundation-l] Five main authors myth
• Next message: [Foundation-l] Five main authors myth
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

On Dec 4, 2007 3:29 PM, Thomas Dalton <thomas.dalton at gmail.com> wrote:

> > It seems the two of you are barking up the same tree. Nowhere does
> > Klaus say that the version history is invalid, quite on the contrary.
> > He is saying that it _is_ the version history, and therefore that one
> > is not allowed to copy Wikipedia material without republishing the
> > history page as well.
>
> He's also saying that the WMF is claiming otherwise. I've seen no such
> claim.
>
>

As the WMF provides databases that do not contain the relevant metadata, I
would certainly say that the WMF's actions amount to a de facto claim that
article content can be distributed without history listings.  If that is not
the WMF's intent, then they ought to at least make clearer to reusers that
they will need more than just the articles dump and provide mirror sites
with a way to obtain and use history information without loading every
historical version of every article.  (Not least because there are no
complete and working history dumps of the largest wikis).

-Robert Rohde

• Previous message: [Foundation-l] Five main authors myth
• Next message: [Foundation-l] Five main authors myth
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]