Summary of the "What we agree on: ..."-threads

It would be nice if more of this were actually strategy related and not just "we think this is a good idea" material.

Advocacy is not a "strategy" in itself. "Carbon footprint" is nicely correct, but also not "strategy."

The issues about how to handle "local language" material (which also relate to the broad "China question") and how to address such broad issues, do impact strategy, and are, IMHO, the most salient of the "agreed upon" material above.

Collect15:35, 3 April 2010

I agree. There is not much of the material that realy leads to additions to the recommendations. But I think the following points in advocay agenda are strategy related at least.

  • Prioritize public domain advocacy over net neutrality advocacy
  • The foundation would be happy to see advocacy on a more local level
  • The Wikimedia Foundation intends to strengthen its relationships with international organizations that share many or all of our values
  • Have a page where advocacy agenda is being built at a high level.

I also have an additional comment to the Local Language Recommendations. In what way will the usability initiative affect the bandwidth and prestanda requirements of the editors connections and computers?

Dafer4515:59, 3 April 2010

As far as I can tell, "net neutrality" only applies in areas where competition for internet service exists -- which is not the entire world. On the other hand, public domain advocacy does not apply to areas with unitary control over the internet either. How can WX actually affect either?

With regard to international organizations - would any benefits reslt which can be measured in any way? I do not regard "getting more money" to be a valid goal in itself <g>.

And I agree that the Local Language part is of notable importance - though in what way can Wx affect bandwidth requirements etc.? Ought WX seek means of compressing material so that the user's computers "reconstitute" condensed material? As articles approach larger and larger sizes, some compaction is certainly feasible, and might represent a strategic goal.

(I use "WX" to mean each single component of the wikiverse, as well as the coordinated acts of such entities)

Collect20:03, 3 April 2010
 

The bandwidth requirements will not be affected when the monobook skin is changed to the usability skin, Vector, and other usability improvements such as the new toolbar is offered as default interface. Users may experience slowness when they use the new interface for the first time, but it will be faster as the program and image files will be stored in the browser cache. --Shuhari 07:18, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

Shuhari07:18, 5 April 2010
Edited by another user.
Last edit: 08:31, 5 April 2010

I tried using prototype.wikimedia.org with firebug activated. It seemed like loading the editing environment for the first time required about 770kb of data to be loaded. On a 56kbps connection that means about 2 minutes at full speed. I am a bit worried that such an amount of data to be loaded at the first edit is likely to discourage new editors, especially in region where GPRS and other connections with similar speeds are likely to dominate. The rest of the editing seemed to be perfectly fine, with most of the time less than 1kb of data being loaded upon interaction with the interface.

Apart from this concern I liked the editing environment very much!

Posted by Dafer45

81.236.4.8908:29, 5 April 2010