Login | Register For Free | Help
Search for: (Advanced)

Mailing List Archive: Wikipedia: Foundation

Google Wave and Wikimedia projects

  

 
First page Previous page 1 2 3 4 Next page Last page  View All Wikipedia foundation RSS feed   Index | Next | Previous | View Threaded


millosh at gmail

May 30, 2009, 4:30 AM

Post #26 of 78 (984 views)
Permalink
Re: Google Wave and Wikimedia projects [In reply to]
On Sat, May 30, 2009 at 1:24 PM, Anthony <wikimail [at] inbox> wrote:
> I thought that's all it was was a web interface...  IIRC the preview was run
> in Chrome and Firefox, wasn't it?

It seems so. And there was one native console client :) (I thought
that at least one of their clients is a native one, but, it seems to
me now that there were no graphical clients at all.)

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l [at] lists
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l


wikimail at inbox

May 30, 2009, 4:55 AM

Post #27 of 78 (989 views)
Permalink
Re: Google Wave and Wikimedia projects [In reply to]
On Sat, May 30, 2009 at 7:24 AM, Anthony <wikimail [at] inbox> wrote:

> I'm not sure if it'll catch on, because Google seems to have added so much
> extraneous crap into the mix
>

Like replying in the middle of a message, not by quoting the original, but
by just editing the person's message to add your question in the middle of
it. How pissed would you be if someone did that on your User talk page?
But yet it got applause. Don't people think? What was the constituency of
the audience, anyway? They were applauding at some pretty horrible ideas.
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l [at] lists
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l


gerard.meijssen at gmail

May 30, 2009, 5:03 AM

Post #28 of 78 (978 views)
Permalink
Re: Google Wave and Wikimedia projects [In reply to]
Hoi,
There was also Safari ... the message was "modern" browsers.. but this is
for the reference implementation Google will build. It was also demonstrated
that you can go as low as a command line tool for this..
Thanks,
GerardM

2009/5/30 Anthony <wikimail [at] inbox>

> On Sat, May 30, 2009 at 6:49 AM, Milos Rancic <millosh [at] gmail> wrote:
>
> > On Sat, May 30, 2009 at 7:13 AM, Tim Starling <tstarling [at] wikimedia>
> > wrote:
> > > Yeah, sure. Like the way Jabber killed proprietary protocols like MSN
> > > and AIM, right? It's been 9 years since the first release now.
> >
> > This is a completely other path. As I said, I thought that the
> > development of something almost identical to the Wave would be much
> > slower. However, at this point, there is one large corporation behind
> > it and it is not partially, like they are behind XMPP with their
> > Gtalk.
>
>
> If AOL had built XMPP into AIM in 1997, the story would have played out
> much
> differently.
>
> > The proprietary IM networks will steal the best ideas from Wave and
> > > add their own bit of marketing spin, which somehow, to the hoards of
> > > faithful users, will seem even cooler than what Google Wave can do.
> > > That's assuming they even perceive a threat.
> >
> > Yes, this is potential problem.
>
>
> It's weird, because what I see as the killer apps for this have nothing to
> do with instant messaging, and nothing to do with email either.
>
> I'm not sure if it'll catch on, because Google seems to have added so much
> extraneous crap into the mix, but given the ability of people to adapt
> Google services to novel uses, maybe it will catch on.
>
> I don't plan on replacing my email or instant messenger with this (though
> hopefully plain old vanilla gmail will be built in and I won't have to). I
> might replace my Google Reader, though, when someone comes up with an RSS
> bot. I might also replace a few private wikis I have, especially if my
> friends on those private wikis find Wave easier to use.
>
> My initial dislike of the idea turned when I stopped trying to think of
> Wave
> as email, as Google is pushing it.
>
> > Browsers are something Microsoft actually supports and packages with
> > > their OS, unlike federated, open-protocol IM clients, which as we've
> > > seen over the past 9 years, they are not interested in. They've even
> > > discontinued their IRC client.
> >
> > There will be web interface, too.
>
>
> I thought that's all it was was a web interface... IIRC the preview was
> run
> in Chrome and Firefox, wasn't it?
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l [at] lists
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l [at] lists
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l


millosh at gmail

May 30, 2009, 5:06 AM

Post #29 of 78 (974 views)
Permalink
Re: Google Wave and Wikimedia projects [In reply to]
On Sat, May 30, 2009 at 1:55 PM, Anthony <wikimail [at] inbox> wrote:
> Like replying in the middle of a message, not by quoting the original, but
> by just editing the person's message to add your question in the middle of
> it.  How pissed would you be if someone did that on your User talk page?
> But yet it got applause.  Don't people think?  What was the constituency of
> the audience, anyway?  They were applauding at some pretty horrible ideas.

If I remember well, it was replying in the middle of a collaborative
document. I suppose that there is an option "remove all comments" or
so. Also, you may trace history of collaboration and comments (at more
intuitive way than on MediaWiki page histories).

BTW, I remember that I was very mad when I saw red lines below my text
in Firefox. Usually, I am writing in Serbian and all of my texts have
red lines below (and spell checkers for synthetic languages are not so
useful yet; there are a lot of possible combinations which makes
situation like "been/bean" very often). But, after some time I
realized that it is a very useful tool. I am even feeding my browser's
spell checkers now.

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l [at] lists
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l


millosh at gmail

May 30, 2009, 5:10 AM

Post #30 of 78 (982 views)
Permalink
Re: Google Wave and Wikimedia projects [In reply to]
On Sat, May 30, 2009 at 2:03 PM, Gerard Meijssen
<gerard.meijssen [at] gmail> wrote:
> There was also Safari ... the message was "modern" browsers.. but this is
> for the reference implementation Google will build. It was also demonstrated
> that you can go as low as a command line tool for this..

Actually, not a command line tool, but a terminal (curses) tool. But,
I may imagine a tool similar to wget (or even wget's evolution).

BTW, old programmers and admins are treating move from line editors to
terminal editors as much bigger advance than move from terminal
systems to windowing systems.

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l [at] lists
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l


gerard.meijssen at gmail

May 30, 2009, 5:13 AM

Post #31 of 78 (988 views)
Permalink
Re: Google Wave and Wikimedia projects [In reply to]
Hoi,
When you paid attention, you would know that it were developers. You are
thinking along the lines of traditional e-mail and YES, you want to know who
did what. You do know that it was explained that they deal with this. When
you forget about the e-mail paradigm and start thinking in terms of the Wiki
paradigm, you may come to the conclusion that they do a great job of
integrating the things that make sense to us.

It has been said often enough that Wikis are to preferred over e-mail. What
I see in Wave is how many of the attributes come to the e-mail and in a way
that is way more poweful because here you can actually send/receive it as
e-mail as well as collaboratively edit.

One of the better parts in the presentation was where they explained that
even though they are building and living this new envirionment, they have to
appreciate the power of new approaches. All in all, the ability to change a
text is what makes it a wiki, the fact that it was received by mail makes it
mail, the combination makes it more powerful and something else.
Thanks,
GerardM


2009/5/30 Anthony <wikimail [at] inbox>

> On Sat, May 30, 2009 at 7:24 AM, Anthony <wikimail [at] inbox> wrote:
>
> > I'm not sure if it'll catch on, because Google seems to have added so
> much
> > extraneous crap into the mix
> >
>
> Like replying in the middle of a message, not by quoting the original, but
> by just editing the person's message to add your question in the middle of
> it. How pissed would you be if someone did that on your User talk page?
> But yet it got applause. Don't people think? What was the constituency of
> the audience, anyway? They were applauding at some pretty horrible ideas.
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l [at] lists
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l [at] lists
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l


thomas.dalton at gmail

May 30, 2009, 5:24 AM

Post #32 of 78 (975 views)
Permalink
Re: Google Wave and Wikimedia projects [In reply to]
2009/5/30 Jussi-Ville Heiskanen <cimonavaro [at] gmail>:
> Thomas Dalton wrote:
>>
>>  E-mail, once
>> it let the military/academia, was a completely new thing, there wasn't
>> anything like it before (the closest thing was telegrams, which
>> charged by the word, could take a few hours to reach their destination
>> and couldn't have attachments).
>>
>>
>
> Not even courier mail?

Courier mail is far far slower than email or telegrams (for long
distance, at least). I've just watched the first 20 minutes of the
presentation and there doesn't seem to be anything new, it's just
combining existing stuff in a fancy way. It's a great app, and I may
well use it, but it isn't going to change the world. It's part of an
incremental progression, it's not a paradigm shift.

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l [at] lists
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l


thomas.dalton at gmail

May 30, 2009, 5:26 AM

Post #33 of 78 (975 views)
Permalink
Re: Google Wave and Wikimedia projects [In reply to]
2009/5/30 Anthony <wikimail [at] inbox>:
> On Sat, May 30, 2009 at 7:24 AM, Anthony <wikimail [at] inbox> wrote:
>
>> I'm not sure if it'll catch on, because Google seems to have added so much
>> extraneous crap into the mix
>>
>
> Like replying in the middle of a message, not by quoting the original, but
> by just editing the person's message to add your question in the middle of
> it.  How pissed would you be if someone did that on your User talk page?
> But yet it got applause.  Don't people think?  What was the constituency of
> the audience, anyway?  They were applauding at some pretty horrible ideas.

That part didn't bother me too much. I hated the way it didn't seem to
indicate what message you were replying to. For the most part, the
conversation had a linear structure, not a tree one. They would reply
to the last message in the conversation and the reply would have the
same indentation as all the rest of the messages. To me, that makes it
look like a reply to the original message that started the wave.

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l [at] lists
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l


wikimail at inbox

May 30, 2009, 5:33 AM

Post #34 of 78 (981 views)
Permalink
Re: Google Wave and Wikimedia projects [In reply to]
On Sat, May 30, 2009 at 8:06 AM, Milos Rancic <millosh [at] gmail> wrote:

> On Sat, May 30, 2009 at 1:55 PM, Anthony <wikimail [at] inbox> wrote:
> > Like replying in the middle of a message, not by quoting the original,
> but
> > by just editing the person's message to add your question in the middle
> of
> > it. How pissed would you be if someone did that on your User talk page?
> > But yet it got applause. Don't people think? What was the constituency
> of
> > the audience, anyway? They were applauding at some pretty horrible
> ideas.
>
> If I remember well, it was replying in the middle of a collaborative
> document. I suppose that there is an option "remove all comments" or
> so. Also, you may trace history of collaboration and comments (at more
> intuitive way than on MediaWiki page histories).


Maybe so. I'm sure there will be a way to turn it off. If not initially
then after the hate mail starts coming in.

And yeah, you can in theory trace the history. But I don't want to do all
that work.

Again, after thinking about it further I guess it has its possible uses.
But they were pitching it as a replacement for email, not as a replacement
for wikis or a new method of communications altogether.

On Sat, May 30, 2009 at 8:13 AM, Gerard Meijssen
<gerard.meijssen [at] gmail>wrote:
>
> When you paid attention, you would know that it were developers.


Well, yes, clearly, but that only partially explains the lack of grasp on
the real world. Seriously, I remember watching some other parts and
thinking about how it was surely written by some geek with no concept of a
world outside of cyberspace.

But the audience seemed to be even in love with Google, almost in a
cult-like way, compared to the average developer. I mean, sure, it was a
self-selected sample, of people interested in Google, but even that doesn't
explain the response. I'm quite interested in Google, and as a shareholder
I am quite biased toward them. But I wouldn't have dreamed of applauding at
some of the crap they revealed.
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l [at] lists
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l


wikimail at inbox

May 30, 2009, 6:06 AM

Post #35 of 78 (979 views)
Permalink
Re: Google Wave and Wikimedia projects [In reply to]
On Sat, May 30, 2009 at 8:26 AM, Thomas Dalton <thomas.dalton [at] gmail>wrote:

> I hated the way it didn't seem to
> indicate what message you were replying to. For the most part, the
> conversation had a linear structure, not a tree one. They would reply
> to the last message in the conversation and the reply would have the
> same indentation as all the rest of the messages. To me, that makes it
> look like a reply to the original message that started the wave.


Heh, that's actually one of the memes in Wikipedia (etc.) talk pages that I
never liked. Too geeky.

Maybe they could do something with color coding... I dunno, I've found
Wikipedia Review standard mode to be the best. If you're changing the
topic, start a new thread. If it's really important that you're replying to
something, quote it.

I guess it goes back to the "discussion vs. collaboration" argument. If the
purpose is discussion for the sake of the active participants, tree
structures are extraneous. If the purpose is creating a collaborative
document for third parties to view later, I think you've gotta go to
"Document Mode". There's probably a lot of improvement that can be made to
each, but I seriously doubt that Google is going about it correctly.

I like the concept of DoubleWiki (
http://www.usemod.com/cgi-bin/mb.pl?DoubleWiki), but that never really
caught on.

The ability to use colors will surely be helpful.
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l [at] lists
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l


thomas.dalton at gmail

May 30, 2009, 6:14 AM

Post #36 of 78 (974 views)
Permalink
Re: Google Wave and Wikimedia projects [In reply to]
2009/5/30 Anthony <wikimail [at] inbox>:
> On Sat, May 30, 2009 at 8:26 AM, Thomas Dalton <thomas.dalton [at] gmail>wrote:
>
>> I hated the way it didn't seem to
>> indicate what message you were replying to. For the most part, the
>> conversation had a linear structure, not a tree one. They would reply
>> to the last message in the conversation and the reply would have the
>> same indentation as all the rest of the messages. To me, that makes it
>> look like a reply to the original message that started the wave.
>
>
> Heh, that's actually one of the memes in Wikipedia (etc.) talk pages that I
> never liked.  Too geeky.

It doesn't have to be indentation, but there should be some clear way
of denoting what something is in reply to. Indentation is the most
common method I've seen, it is not restricted to Wikipedia (or even
wikis in general) by any means. I can't think of a way that would be
better than indentation, but that may just be because I've become so
immersed in that style of communication. You mention doing it using
colours - I can see a really cool way of doing it by having a reply be
the same colour as the message being replied to but slightly darker
and with a slight tint to it, different replies would have different
tints. You would then end up with a beautiful rainbow of messages. As
cool as that would be, I still think indentation is better!

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l [at] lists
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l


midom.lists at gmail

May 30, 2009, 6:25 AM

Post #37 of 78 (978 views)
Permalink
Re: Google Wave and Wikimedia projects [In reply to]
> It's a great app,

look at it the other way! finally someone implemented LiquidThreads!

Cheers,
Domas

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l [at] lists
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l


wikimail at inbox

May 30, 2009, 6:33 AM

Post #38 of 78 (976 views)
Permalink
Re: Google Wave and Wikimedia projects [In reply to]
On Sat, May 30, 2009 at 9:14 AM, Thomas Dalton <thomas.dalton [at] gmail>wrote:

> 2009/5/30 Anthony <wikimail [at] inbox>:
> > On Sat, May 30, 2009 at 8:26 AM, Thomas Dalton <thomas.dalton [at] gmail
> >wrote:
> >
> >> I hated the way it didn't seem to
> >> indicate what message you were replying to. For the most part, the
> >> conversation had a linear structure, not a tree one. They would reply
> >> to the last message in the conversation and the reply would have the
> >> same indentation as all the rest of the messages. To me, that makes it
> >> look like a reply to the original message that started the wave.
> >
> >
> > Heh, that's actually one of the memes in Wikipedia (etc.) talk pages that
> I
> > never liked. Too geeky.
>
> It doesn't have to be indentation, but there should be some clear way
> of denoting what something is in reply to. Indentation is the most
> common method I've seen, it is not restricted to Wikipedia (or even
> wikis in general) by any means.


No, it isn't. But it does seem to be restricted to geeks and geek websites
(the one outside of Wikipedia that immediately comes to mind is Slashdot).
Even the idea that each message is "in reply to" exactly one previous
message doesn't seem to fit with real world conversations. Real people
don't think that way or converse that way.

A: "What's your favorite color?"
B: "I like red"
C: "I like green"
D: "Red and green? Are you nuts? Blue is the best color of all?"
A: I agree with B, red is definitely the nicest color.
C: But isn't the wavelength of green so much more asthetically pleasing?

How do you form a tree out of that?
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l [at] lists
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l


thomas.dalton at gmail

May 30, 2009, 7:59 AM

Post #39 of 78 (976 views)
Permalink
Re: Google Wave and Wikimedia projects [In reply to]
2009/5/30 Anthony <wikimail [at] inbox>:
> A: "What's your favorite color?"
> B: "I like red"
> C: "I like green"
> D: "Red and green?  Are you nuts?  Blue is the best color of all?"
> A: I agree with B, red is definitely the nicest color.
> C: But isn't the wavelength of green so much more asthetically pleasing?
>
> How do you form a tree out of that?

The 2nd and 3rd lines are each replies to the 1st. The 4th is a reply
to both the 2nd and 3rd, so breaks the tree somewhat (no system is
perfect) - you have to choose between simplicity and completeness, you
could implement it as a full graph, rather than just a tree, but at
the expensive of an intuitive and elegant UI. The 5th line is a reply
to the 2nd, and the 6th is difficult to work out without knowing the
non-verbal communication that was going along at the same time, it
could be a question aimed at a specific person, or it could be a
question to the floor (which doesn't fit into the tree structure) -
the lack of non-verbal cues is why things need to be made explicit
online.

Conversations that take place in real time (particularly face-to-face,
to a lesser extent on things like IRC) don't tend to follow a tree
structure as closely as conversations with a wait before responses. In
a face-to-face conversation, you can't have two people saying
something at the same time, or someone saying something before they
are up-to-date with the whole conversation. Those things happen all
the time with email conversations, or conversations on web forums,
which is why seeing the conversation as a tree, rather than a linear
progression (which it simply isn't), is helpful.

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l [at] lists
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l


tstarling at wikimedia

May 30, 2009, 11:06 AM

Post #40 of 78 (980 views)
Permalink
Re: Google Wave and Wikimedia projects [In reply to]
Milos Rancic wrote:
> On Sat, May 30, 2009 at 7:13 AM, Tim Starling <tstarling [at] wikimedia> wrote:
>> It's not free software. The blog post says they "intend to open source
>> the code". That generally means the code quality is so bad that they'd
>> be embarrassed to make it public, and would like to clean it up to the
>> point where humans can understand it, but currently they have more
>> important development priorities and no schedule to do such a thing.
>
> This is why that (very long) presentation is important. They clearly
> said that they want to make their implementation as the referent open
> source implementation.

Funny, that's exactly what the blog post said, which I just quoted. I
guess I was right not to waste an hour of my Saturday watching that
presentation.

Wanting it to be free software does not make it free software. The
code has to actually be published with a permissive license. Until
then, it is proprietary software.

-- Tim Starling


_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l [at] lists
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l


thomas.dalton at gmail

May 30, 2009, 11:14 AM

Post #41 of 78 (976 views)
Permalink
Re: Google Wave and Wikimedia projects [In reply to]
2009/5/30 Tim Starling <tstarling [at] wikimedia>:
> Milos Rancic wrote:
>> On Sat, May 30, 2009 at 7:13 AM, Tim Starling <tstarling [at] wikimedia> wrote:
>>> It's not free software. The blog post says they "intend to open source
>>> the code". That generally means the code quality is so bad that they'd
>>> be embarrassed to make it public, and would like to clean it up to the
>>> point where humans can understand it, but currently they have more
>>> important development priorities and no schedule to do such a thing.
>>
>> This is why that (very long) presentation is important. They clearly
>> said that they want to make their implementation as the referent open
>> source implementation.
>
> Funny, that's exactly what the blog post said, which I just quoted. I
> guess I was right not to waste an hour of my Saturday watching that
> presentation.

I watched it in the end - it really is a very impressive bit of
software. I don't see much that is new in it, but it brings things
together really neatly. I can see myself using it once it comes out.

> Wanting it to be free software does not make it free software. The
> code has to actually be published with a permissive license. Until
> then, it is proprietary software.

It's not the software that's important. It's the protocol and the API.
While it would be great if their client was made open and free, that
isn't necessary for it to be a success, as long as the protocol and
API are truly free.

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l [at] lists
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l


gerard.meijssen at gmail

May 30, 2009, 11:15 AM

Post #42 of 78 (977 views)
Permalink
Re: Google Wave and Wikimedia projects [In reply to]
Hoi,
The license has been published here...
http://www.waveprotocol.org/patent-license
Thanks,
GerardM


2009/5/30 Tim Starling <tstarling [at] wikimedia>

> Milos Rancic wrote:
> > On Sat, May 30, 2009 at 7:13 AM, Tim Starling <tstarling [at] wikimedia>
> wrote:
> >> It's not free software. The blog post says they "intend to open source
> >> the code". That generally means the code quality is so bad that they'd
> >> be embarrassed to make it public, and would like to clean it up to the
> >> point where humans can understand it, but currently they have more
> >> important development priorities and no schedule to do such a thing.
> >
> > This is why that (very long) presentation is important. They clearly
> > said that they want to make their implementation as the referent open
> > source implementation.
>
> Funny, that's exactly what the blog post said, which I just quoted. I
> guess I was right not to waste an hour of my Saturday watching that
> presentation.
>
> Wanting it to be free software does not make it free software. The
> code has to actually be published with a permissive license. Until
> then, it is proprietary software.
>
> -- Tim Starling
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l [at] lists
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l [at] lists
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l


gerard.meijssen at gmail

May 30, 2009, 11:34 AM

Post #43 of 78 (981 views)
Permalink
Re: Google Wave and Wikimedia projects [In reply to]
Hoi,
One of the things that I really appreciate is the decision by Google to
create a reference implementation and the way they expect contributions to
the protocol to be accompanied by working code implemented as a patch for
the reference implementation. The reference implementation will as a product
be ready to implement.

For Wave to be a success it has to be open and interoperable. In my opinion
Google does everything it can to ensure that everyone can ride the wave and
benefit of the shared software.. When extension can not be shared, their
restricted use will make it fail because the functionality is not available
for the person who might be on a different server.
Thanks,
GerardM

2009/5/30 Thomas Dalton <thomas.dalton [at] gmail>

> 2009/5/30 Tim Starling <tstarling [at] wikimedia>:
> > Milos Rancic wrote:
> >> On Sat, May 30, 2009 at 7:13 AM, Tim Starling <tstarling [at] wikimedia>
> wrote:
> >>> It's not free software. The blog post says they "intend to open source
> >>> the code". That generally means the code quality is so bad that they'd
> >>> be embarrassed to make it public, and would like to clean it up to the
> >>> point where humans can understand it, but currently they have more
> >>> important development priorities and no schedule to do such a thing.
> >>
> >> This is why that (very long) presentation is important. They clearly
> >> said that they want to make their implementation as the referent open
> >> source implementation.
> >
> > Funny, that's exactly what the blog post said, which I just quoted. I
> > guess I was right not to waste an hour of my Saturday watching that
> > presentation.
>
> I watched it in the end - it really is a very impressive bit of
> software. I don't see much that is new in it, but it brings things
> together really neatly. I can see myself using it once it comes out.
>
> > Wanting it to be free software does not make it free software. The
> > code has to actually be published with a permissive license. Until
> > then, it is proprietary software.
>
> It's not the software that's important. It's the protocol and the API.
> While it would be great if their client was made open and free, that
> isn't necessary for it to be a success, as long as the protocol and
> API are truly free.
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l [at] lists
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l [at] lists
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l


cohesion at sleepyhead

May 30, 2009, 12:11 PM

Post #44 of 78 (979 views)
Permalink
Re: Google Wave and Wikimedia projects [In reply to]
On Fri, May 29, 2009 at 6:58 PM, David Gerard <dgerard [at] gmail> wrote:
>
> 2009/5/30 Thomas Dalton <thomas.dalton [at] gmail>:
>
> > I don't get it... this is just MSN Messenger on steroids. It's a great
> > idea and if it works it should be really useful, but it isn't
> > world-changing and certainly isn't going to restructure the internet.
>
>
> No, no - it's Google Chat on steroids! With email and groups and uh
> other stuff! Picasa! And you can save it all as Knols!
>


Of it's word processing on steroids, or forums, or group wikis... The
fact that it is all these things in one fairly simple to use interface
is why people are excited.

I can't sell my luddite co-workers on the idea of a blog, or a wiki,
but this is more obviously approachable. For more normal web users,
there are obviously a lot of advanced uses as well.

Judson
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Cohesion

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l [at] lists
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l


cohesion at sleepyhead

May 30, 2009, 12:17 PM

Post #45 of 78 (977 views)
Permalink
Re: Google Wave and Wikimedia projects [In reply to]
On Fri, May 29, 2009 at 6:42 PM, Anthony <wikimail [at] inbox> wrote:
> That would be great, but wouldn't it also mean the death of Google and
> pretty much any company which relies on web advertising to make money?  How
> do you make money off of P2P?  Software and data license fees, I guess, but
> is Google really prepared to go to that model?  And in a world where P2P
> means easy piracy, is the world ready?


Well, the protocol is very much not P2P in the normal sense, there are
authoritative servers, and secure XMPP connections for everything.

It's a peered protocol in terms of the servers though, like smtp.
Plenty of companies make money on smtp/pop/imap now, I don't see this
being any different. Gmail has ads, so why not wave clients. Sure you
will be able to load up thunderbird, or mail.app or something and not
see ads, but if google makes a better client, people will use it. It's
not zero-sum. I think email is a better analogy for a lot of this.

Judson
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Cohesion

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l [at] lists
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l


cohesion at sleepyhead

May 30, 2009, 12:38 PM

Post #46 of 78 (980 views)
Permalink
Re: Google Wave and Wikimedia projects [In reply to]
On Fri, May 29, 2009 at 9:26 PM, Erik Moeller <erik [at] wikimedia> wrote:
> 2009/5/29 Milos Rancic <millosh [at] gmail>:
>> Probably, some of you already saw that Google made something for which
>> I think that it will be the new form of the mainstream Internet
>> perception. You may read Slashdot article [1], a good description at
>> the blog "Google Operating System" [2] (not officially connected with
>> Google) and, of course, you may see the official site with more than
>> one hour of presentation [3].
>
> I've watched pieces of the presentation, but not the whole thing. Is
> it clear at this point exactly how free/open the entire stack is going
> to be? I.e. will it have dependencies on proprietary services to work
> or work well?
>

The protocol is completely open, and published: http://www.waveprotocol.org/

Their wave client is going to be opened, and will server as the
reference implementation. My real guess is they open source a
reference implementation that works, but isn't their actual client.
Some people on twitter and in the wave protocol mailing list have been
saying that their client is very dependent on google server structure,
and needs to be normalized before it's open sourced. I don't think
this is a big deal though. gmail isn't open source, but thunderbird
is, and they can send and receive email to each other. If google is
going to make an open source client that people can look at and start
from also, great. (this is just a guess, they may open source their
actual server side version, but i really can't see that...)

The Extensions, and robots and gadgets api is open, BUT 3rd party
developers don't have to open source their work. So, some of the
things they showed like the maps gadget, and the spellcheck are what
they are calling internal extensions. They have a lot of these up
already with source code
http://code.google.com/apis/wave/samples/index.html but I certainly
wouldn't expect all 3rd party people to do this (facebook extension
etc)

Judson
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Cohesion

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l [at] lists
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l


email at mikepeel

May 30, 2009, 1:29 PM

Post #47 of 78 (986 views)
Permalink
Re: Google Wave and Wikimedia projects [In reply to]
Having just watched the talk/show/discussion/dancing, I agree
completely with Steve's comments on wikien-l:

On 29 May 2009, at 04:52, Steve Bennett wrote:
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v_UyVmITiYQ&eurl=http%3A%2F%
> 2Fwave.google.com%2F&feature=player_embedded
>
> (See from about 31:00 onwards for the relevant bit...)
>
> Real-time collaborative editing. Scroll back and forth through
> history, showing changes by a single user or of a single paragraph.
> Embedded comments updated in real time. Edit from multiple clients.
>
> Could we please have all of this? This is several orders of magnitude
> better than MediaWiki's collaborative editing features.
>
> Steve
>
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l [at] lists
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>

I'm not so sure about the rest of the wave idea (I dislike being
trapped within a browser rather than using the whole of a computer's
interface, and I'm vary wary about the apparent lack of interaction
with existing systems and the whole client-server interaction), I
thought that the interface was amazing.

I would love to see a Wikipedia article develop along the lines of
the play back option; it would be great to be able to instantly edit
Wikipedia, and see other people's edits in real time (although real-
time vandalism could be interesting...). Being able to drag-and-drop
images into an article/onto Commons from a desktop, or from elsewhere
on the web, would be a real timesaver.

Could this be considered by the Usability team, or is this way beyond
their scope? Could we ask Google nicely to come up with a brand new
interface for mediawiki? ;-)

Mike

On 29 May 2009, at 20:10, Milos Rancic wrote:

> Probably, some of you already saw that Google made something for which
> I think that it will be the new form of the mainstream Internet
> perception. You may read Slashdot article [1], a good description at
> the blog "Google Operating System" [2] (not officially connected with
> Google) and, of course, you may see the official site with more than
> one hour of presentation [3].
>
> I expected such kind of tool (a client connected with others via P2P
> XML-based protocol; with servers for identification). However, I
> didn't expect that i will come so soon, that it will be done by one
> large corporation and that it will be done at the right way: open
> protocol, free software referent implementation.
>
> At the official site they said that it will start to work during this
> year. As one large corporation is behind the project, as well as free
> and open source community is able to participate, I have no doubts
> that it will be implemented all over the Internet (and not just
> Internet) very quickly. Probably, in two years the basic component of
> one modern operating system will not be a Web browser, but a Wave
> client. Probably, Web will become a storage system, while all of the
> interaction will be done via Waves.
>
> This development of Internet is very strongly related to the
> Wikimedia projects:
> * I want to be able to edit Wikipedia through the Wave client.
> * I want to add my own notes to articles, history of articles etc.
> * I want to have collection of my knowledge at one place, including
> Wikipedia articles and my notes.
> * I want to be able to make a program which would analyze articles on
> Wikipedia and to give program and/or analysis to my friends.
> * I want many more things to be browsable or editable or whatever from
> a Wave client...
>
> All of those my (but, in one year, not just my) wishes may be
> fulfilled just through work on MediaWiki and Pywikipediabot. So, I am
> calling all of you who are willing to think about it or who are at the
> position to think about it -- to start with thinking :)
>
> [1] - http://tech.slashdot.org/story/09/05/28/1912226/Googles-Wave-
> Blurs-Chat-Email-Collaboration-Software
> [2] - http://googlesystem.blogspot.com/2009/05/google-wave.html
> [3] - http://wave.google.com/
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l [at] lists
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l


_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l [at] lists
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l


thewub.wiki at googlemail

May 30, 2009, 2:52 PM

Post #48 of 78 (978 views)
Permalink
Re: Google Wave and Wikimedia projects [In reply to]
2009/5/30 Judson Dunn <cohesion [at] sleepyhead>:
> On Fri, May 29, 2009 at 6:58 PM, David Gerard <dgerard [at] gmail> wrote:
>>
>> 2009/5/30 Thomas Dalton <thomas.dalton [at] gmail>:
>>
>> > I don't get it... this is just MSN Messenger on steroids. It's a great
>> > idea and if it works it should be really useful, but it isn't
>> > world-changing and certainly isn't going to restructure the internet.
>>
>>
>> No, no - it's Google Chat on steroids! With email and groups and uh
>> other stuff! Picasa! And you can save it all as Knols!
>>
>
> Of it's word processing on steroids, or forums, or group wikis...

The best description I've seen so far was "FriendFeed... with benefits" :-)

Pete / the wub

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l [at] lists
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l


cohesion at sleepyhead

May 30, 2009, 2:59 PM

Post #49 of 78 (976 views)
Permalink
Re: Google Wave and Wikimedia projects [In reply to]
On Sat, May 30, 2009 at 4:52 PM, Peter Coombe
<thewub.wiki [at] googlemail> wrote:
> The best description I've seen so far was "FriendFeed... with benefits" :-)
>


Right, it's not entirely new, which is I think why some people are
saying it isn't a big deal. The problem is, it's only not new for
people like us. We obviously see parallels to talk pages, and wikis,
and other collaborative software. Most people have never really used a
wiki, or even a mailing list. And I mean most people in developed
countries who use computers. This interface is simple enough that it
offers the benefits of wikis, mailing lists, and shared documents to
people who can currently only use email. That's why it's important.

Judson
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Cohesion

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l [at] lists
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l


lars at aronsson

May 30, 2009, 4:40 PM

Post #50 of 78 (971 views)
Permalink
Re: Google Wave and Wikimedia projects [In reply to]
Judson Dunn wrote:

> I can't sell my luddite co-workers on the idea of a blog, or a
> wiki, but this is more obviously approachable. For more normal
> web users, there are obviously a lot of advanced uses as well.

Google Wave combines many concepts, such as mail discussion
threads, Twitter-like short message discussions, instant
messaging, wiki-like edit history and an animated playback.
The idea of showing diffs since the user last viewed the same
wave, is very similar to Flagged revisions.

My guess is that this mix is too advanced for most users and will
be a hard sell, almost like an automobile with a joystick (like an
airplane) instead of a steering wheel.

As a stand-alone server on a developer team intranet server, this
might be useful, perhaps a competitor to MediaWiki+Bugzilla or
Trac. But the server-to-server federation protocol is useful only
when many others run compatible servers, and that could take a
long time. Google can of course let GMail and Blogger run this
protocol, but that doesn't mean all existing users will start to
understand "wave" conversations. Instead, old-school e-mail
conversations might take place over this new protocol.


--
Lars Aronsson (lars [at] aronsson)
Aronsson Datateknik - http://aronsson.se

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l [at] lists
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

First page Previous page 1 2 3 4 Next page Last page  View All Wikipedia foundation RSS feed   Index | Next | Previous | View Threaded
 
 


Interested in having your list archived? Contact Gossamer Threads
 
  Web Applications & Managed Hosting Powered by Gossamer Threads Inc.