bug-gne
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Bug-gne]A suggestion for reformulation


From: Tom Chance
Subject: Re: [Bug-gne]A suggestion for reformulation
Date: Sun, 25 Feb 2001 03:20:50 -0800 (PST)

I think this is overcomplicating it. What we have to
remember here is that 99% of the people contributing
to this project won't be half as dedicated as us. Many
will be people who have been very generous in donating
the time to find/write the article, and go to our web
site with it. We should make it a one-step process for
authors (unless they want help with grammar etc.).

For us, and the scripts that will process this
material, we also want as little work as possible
whilst still hosting all the material. I would have
thought the idea of having GNE host it as we had said
before, and then having no published version official
to GNE (only people's classifications) so that we
can't be sued as publishers, was great! One of us can
set up a classification with everything in, ane keep
it under that name (not GNE) so it is all accessible.

The only hard thing to do from this is to make the
process of creating your own classification easy,
otherwise we'll end up with all of about 3 which isn't
much use. But then again, not so easy that we become
innundated with classifications people make like
"references I used in my physics investigation into LC
circuits", because then it would become confusing for
users. If we could just have a list of all the
articles, which you can search/broswe/etc. and add
whole subjects or groups in, that (I think) will be
fine.

It allows for mirrors, it keeps articles persistent,
it means there is no editorship over the article
display or storage (unless voluntarily requested), and
we are (so far as we seem to know) legally o.k.


Tom Chance


--- Imran Ghory <address@hidden> wrote: > On 24
Feb 2001, at 14:17, Bob Dodd wrote:
> 
> > 
> > --- Imran Ghory <address@hidden> wrote:
> > [snip]
> > > The author would then submit the URL to a
> central database. 
> > > 
> > > Anyone could use the central database to get the
> articles.
> > [snip]
> > 
> > Does that mean the material content is on non-GNE
> servers?
> 
> Yes.
> 
> > How would we
> > guarantee its persistence
> 
> We wouldn't, the data wouldn't become persistent
> until an 
> index/front-end accepted it, at that point it would
> be copied on to 
> their servers.
> 
> > (or provide mirrors of GNE)?
> 
> The mirrors could be provided by taking a copy of
> the indexes, or 
> even of the front-ends.
> 
> > Plus, how would we ensure the content stays
> stable?
> 
> The ways that were discussed before, a unique
> ID+versionnumber.
> 
> > I also wonder about the usual legal problems of
> providing links to
> > certain categories of material. If GNE never looks
> the the content, we
> > may be in a stronger legal position than if we
> actively know what we're
> > linking to, but I still think about the French and
> Yahoo...
> 
> I thought that was related to the fact that nazi
> memrobilia were for 
> sale on Yahoo auctions ?
> 
> Imran
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Bug-gne mailing list
> address@hidden
> http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-gne


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail. 
http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/



reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]