[03:11:47] These two sentences seem to be add odds with each other: "a software system determines the community structure that evolves around the system" and "we should be careful to design for the world as it is and as it likely will be, and not for the world we wish to be". Or am I misreading them? [03:13:27] That's right (re @AracasDragon: I suppose it's discussion now but choice later) [03:15:45] Nikki , yes you are right, even on the same wiki the might be several communities. But it is much harder to have one community across several wikis. In addition, roles and some rules would be shared across all the communities of a wiki, which can be painful for some of the communities. [03:16:23] But all of these aren't absolute arguments, but arguments of measure, which need to be weighted against each other. [03:21:56] @waldyrious yes, they might be possibly contradictory. What I wanted to say with the first sentence was that the choice of what wikis we have will have an impact on the constitution of the communities. The second sentence was specifically meant to say that we shouldn't choose an architecture that assumes that all the communities will be rosy sunshine love fest with each other, bu [03:21:58] t there might be conflicts, and we should consider an architecture that can achieve our goals robustly even in face of expected inter-wiki conflicts [03:23:57] I see, thanks for clarifying. [03:26:17] Thanks for asking [08:10:19] what if a user who works exclusively on abstract wants to have a bigger power on the hosting wiki (admin?) but since he doesn't (want to) know the main content work he wouldn't be elected? (re @vrandecic: Nikki , yes you are right, even on the same wiki the might be several communities. But it is much harder to have one community a...) [08:11:45] and, since there's a single login the community should be unique also now? so the thinking is on how and why existing communities don't work together [13:46:41] Yes, that's exactly the kind of problem I'm worried about. (re @iamsabas: what if a user who works exclusively on abstract wants to have a bigger power on the hosting wiki (admin?) but since he doesn't ...) [13:49:28] And that's what I meant for not solving for the world as we wish it to be: let's not assume that suddenly the inter-wiki community cooperation will work really good, or "here's a plan how to fix inter-wiki collaboration, let's launch that in parallel, assume it succeeds, and plan our architecture for that" (re @iamsabas: and, since there's a single login the community should be u [13:49:28] nique also now? so the thinking is on how and why existing communitie...) [13:50:08] I'd love us to fix that problem - I don't want to presuppose that fix [15:53:32] I think the point I'm trying to make is that we shouldn't assume that shoehorning it into an existing project will be a net benefit - there might be people involved in both who like it, but there's just as much chance that people will resent having another project added onto theirs (there are people on commons who hate sdc and even people in wikidata who hate lexemes) (re @vrande [15:53:32] cic: Nikki , yes you are right, even on the same wiki the might be several communities. But it is much harder to have one community a...) [15:54:35] so I think the most sensible place to put it, if we want to minimise community fragmenting as much as possible, would be wikifunctions somewhere, so that a community can grow that includes both [21:07:27] I see your point and your argument. I still think that Functions and abstract content about items go less well together then structured data about items and abstract content about items. [21:11:40] In Wikidata I have difficulties to find Lexemes during search. So I am not sure if it will be easy enough to find Abstract Content for editing if it is located in Wikidata. I prefer an own Wiki for Abstract Content. [21:14:29] I hear your point. And I think Wikidata should really fix the search for lexemes. Are you using the l: prefix? [21:20:11] I have not used it. I tried it and I was able to find Lexemes. Thank you for this tip. [21:20:57] It's a super hidden feature, so that needs to be fixed, but hey, at least there's a workaround [21:29:31] Re: Search: I frequently use both a browser extension (for mouse-selected text), and browser-shortcuts (for URL-bar typing), for rapid & direct access to search at many (14!) sites. Notes at https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Quiddity_(WMF)/search_tips [21:34:01] "mw" is a strange single letter :P (re @wmtelegram_bot: Re: Search: I frequently use both a browser extension (for mouse-selected text), and browser-shortcuts (for URL-bar t...) [21:36:09] vivaldi has something similar to firefox when right-clicking, I don't know what it says exactly because my interface is in german, but something like "add as search engine" [21:37:39] and I'm a prolific user of that feature. I apparently have exactly 100 searches set up 😅