Talk:Wikitext standard: Difference between revisions

anwsers to 142.177.X.X. Please note the edits in Talk:Interwiki link standard first
No edit summary
 
(anwsers to 142.177.X.X. Please note the edits in Talk:Interwiki link standard first)
 
Line 1: Line 1:
Putting all external links in proper [[interwiki link standard]] form is the first step to supporting it in software directly.  If the [[standard wiki URI]] is also supported properly on the target wikis, the translation is automatic, no brains required, no knowledge of which version of [[MediaWiki]] or [[GetWiki]] they run, etc..  This is obviously necessary for the [[GFDL text corpus]] to evolve independent of [[Wikimedia]], which ought to be our goal.
Putting all external links in proper [[interwiki link standard]] form is the first step to supporting it in software directly.   
 
:May I point your attention to what I wrote in [[Talk:Interwiki link standard]] that you are requesting [[MediaWiki]] (or other) developers to reverse from
 
service:language
:to
language:service
 
:as an interwiki standard. highly unlikely. And what would be gained by the syntax change from the convention of now-and-here? Nothing IMO.
 
If the [[standard wiki URI]] is also supported properly on the target wikis, the translation is automatic, no brains required, no knowledge of which version of [[MediaWiki]] or [[GetWiki]] they run, etc..   
 
:Evolution of [[GPL]] and [[GFDL]] systems will drive it naturally to behave in this manner in the future, so I guess we agree on this point.
 
This is obviously necessary for the [[GFDL text corpus]] to evolve independent of [[Wikimedia]], which ought to be our goal.
 
:Independent? Whooa. Hold your horses. Wikipedia is established as the primary gateway into the vastest parts of the [[GFDL text corpus]] known to me so to declare '''independence''' is '''taking the larger crowd to note''' silly --[[User:Juxo|Juxo]] 21:52, 9 Mar 2004 (EET)


If it isn't, we're not working on the same project, obviously.
If it isn't, we're not working on the same project, obviously.
: Are we ? ;)
9,842

edits