Meta:International Beer Parlour
Start a new discussion
- 1 WT.social
- 2 Server updated
- 3 Need help in importing TSV
- 4 Nginx
- 5 Noticed a page is broken on the community data page
- 6 External complements included in the definition
- 7 How to move page
- 8 Location of the adjective
- 9 Statistics about Omegawiki's evolution
- 10 Signature button
- 11 Babelnet
- 12 License
- I created an account and when going to the link I get nothing about OmegaWiki, but an invite to donate to wt.social to gain access to the site - weird, very weird - it's a bit like asking our contributors money to be able to add data. Hmmm ... or is there something I am missing? --Sabine (talk) 17:45, 12 January 2020 (CET)
- Ok, I went to my profile and searched for OmegaWiki and so I could find the page. Well, I leave my first comment, so others that experience the same know that it is not necessary to pay. --Sabine (talk) 17:48, 12 January 2020 (CET)
Indeed it is not necessary to contribute with £,€ or $ just like in all WMF-projects as long as you do not become a member of what they call chapter. I have to get used to the interface since it is different from here and practically all "normal" wikis. Klaas `Z4␟` V: 13:12, 13 January 2020 (CET)
I will put it here so that I can remove it from the Sitenotice.
The server (debian) has been updated with a new version of apache2, and php7. Mysql had been replaced by Mariadb. I don't know much about the latter but it seems to be no different than mysql and there was nothing particular to do for transferring the database.
Mediawiki has been upgraded from 1.27 to 1.31. 1.31 is the long term stable (LTS) release. I plan to stay up to date with LTS release mostly for security reasons, and then I don't have to upgrade as often as if using the normal stable releases. Some things have changed, some fonts, colors and some options for admins, but not much, and I did not have to change the OmegaWiki code. The search field (top right) now works for the Expression namespace without me needing to hack the code. However, it shows "Expression:" everywhere which I would like to get rid of (my hack was better...).
The html tables colors also have been a bit changed because I replaced some (stupid) html tag with some css to reduce the html size. I could define more colors in css. I think for the moment tables in edit mode are all white. I can also add borders, etc. I am not good with design so I take any advice.
At some point I will try to use nginx instead of Apache to see if it is faster (I heard rumors). I have already a test server running with nginx, but configuring nginx is always a bit of a mystery and finger-crossing.
Everything at a rather slow space, the combination of home office stuck with two young very noisy kids does not give me much free time and sleep and Konzentrationsfähigkeit.
- Thanks a lot for this update. I could use the site almost all the time during the update. I've also noticed some helpful changes in the CSS of some forms that improves their usability. Great job. Ascánder (talk) 03:20, 8 June 2020 (CEST)
Need help in importing TSV
Hello, i need some help in importing translation of English to Santali bilingual with definition and translation. I have exported TSV then translated and added definition offline. I want to import the same by importing TSV, but unable to due to non-administrative privilege. Prasanta Hembram (talk) 07:51, 20 June 2020 (CEST)
- Hi, I have given you the necessary import rights (I think).
- Please try first with a small subset to see that it works fine (it has been some time since we last use automatic import, so it is mostly to see that there is no bug in it)
- and then you can import the rest.
- In any case, if there is some problem, tell me and I can usually solve it by modifying the database directly. (we don't have a revert function like a normal wiki...).
- Thanks for contributing. --Kip (talk) 15:15, 20 June 2020 (CEST)
The OmegaWiki is now using Nginx (instead of Apache2). I will see if it makes any difference in terms of speed.
And I doubled mysql memory usage ( SET GLOBAL innodb_buffer_pool_size=268435456; ) . It's never a good idea to change many parameters at once, but it's more fun. --Kip (talk) 15:47, 30 July 2020 (CEST)
Noticed a page is broken on the community data page
- Thanks for reporting. I had not seen that. That should be fixed now!
- (error was caused because we have an older version of MediaWiki and they changed some function names and changed our codes with it) --Kip (talk) 14:55, 3 August 2020 (CEST)
External complements included in the definition
In many cases, a complement, which is not included in the meaning of the word, is included in the definition. For instance DefinedMeaning:bypass_(1112487): "To avoid an obstacle by going around it.". Strictly speaking, this definition seems to me incorrect, because "to bypass" just means "To avoid (...) by going around it.". The obstacle has to be expressed separately, as in "We bypassed the mountain."; it is not included in the verb. Let's now see a correct example: DefinedMeaning:cook_(479132): "To prepare a meal or a single dish." and DefinedMeaning:prepare_(839220): "To make ready for eating or drinking.". This is clear: the object is included in the 1st definition, so the verb is intransitive, as in "She is cooking.", but it is not included in the 2nd definition, which obviously needs an object, as in "She is cooking the hare.", the verb being transitive here. But in Castilian, the 2 definitions (for "cocinar") are respectively "Preparar una comida o un solo plato." and "Hacer que algo esté listo para ser comido o bebido.", so both verbs seem to be intransitive, the object being included in the definition itself, and it is confusing. Why do we add such complements inside the definition? Usually because the usual grammatical construction needs it, or to indicate a specialisation of the main word. For instance, to "bypass" doesn't mean to avoid anything or anybody: the avoided thing must be an obstacle. Sometimes, the difference between 2 words depends only on a complement, as for "to breastfeed" v. "to suckle". I suggested in 2010 a set of rules to make this clear both for humans and translation machines (though the current state of the art doesn't use this kind of information): International_Beer_Parlour/Archive20110831#.22Usage.22_fields (See also Help_talk:DefinedMeaning#Connotations.2C_level_of_language.2C_degree_of_specialisation.2C_idiomaticity_and_degree_of_accuracy). My proposal was not accepted. So I make a simpler one: to put between brackets, inside definitions, complements which must be expressed separately from the word being defined. For instance: "To avoid [an obstacle] by going around it. --Fiable.biz 2020-08-18.
- I agree with the brackets!
- The tlfi uses this syntax (for "cuisiner"), with a different use of [ ] and ( ).
- Préparer, accommoder (un plat, des mets).
- [Le compl. d'obj. désigne une manifestation de l'esprit hum.] Préparer avec soin (en secret ou d'une manière peu avouable).
- I think it would make sense to use the same difference between the two brackets, since we already use (sometimes...) [ ] for words that are difficult to define in a standard way. For example for but (en). --Kip (talk) 11:23, 18 August 2020 (CEST)
- I support this and, since nobody has opposed to it for nearly 2 months, let's consider it is decided. Fiable.biz 2020-11-03.
How to move page
I was working on a DefinedMeaning, DefinedMeaning:Cacique (1756849), and I didn't realized that the name was in upper case. I need to change it to "cacique" in lower case. Is there a way I can do this? I didn't find a "move page" on the special pages... --Luk3 (talk) 23:23, 21 September 2020 (CEST)
- Click on 'More' next to the 'search'-field under your name. One of the options will be 'move' if you have this permission. If not you may ask an admin to do it or give you the privilege. It's done now. Klaas `Z4␟` V: 23:13, 28 September 2020 (CEST)
- Sorry for the late reply,
- No, the DefinedMeaning pages should not be moved, this only creates problems but will not solve the page name. It is enough to correct the translation (as you did), and that Expression:cacique is ok. The rest should be done automatically by the software, when we program that... It is bothering us since the beginning (if only I had some time to program this... don't make kids). --Kip (talk) 13:08, 30 September 2020 (CEST)
Location of the adjective
Hello. In French and Spanish (and surely in other languages too), the attributive adjective can be placed before or after the noun, depending on the adjective. It seems that short adjectives, which are usually common ones, are more likely to be placed before the noun. Examples in French: "un arbre vert" but "un grand arbre", in Spanish: "la época clásica" but "diversos lugares". Exceptionally, the location may change the meaning, for instance "un grand homme" (a great man, a famous man) versus "un homme grand" (a tall man). More often, changing the location of some adjectives makes the wording poetical, for example "vertes prairies" is more poetical than "prairies vertes". In some cases, both locations are accepted, like "pays merveilleux" and "merveilleux pays", though the latter sounds to me slightly more literary or slightly smoother. I suggest the location of the adjective, in languages where it is not fix, be included as a new field in the word's "property" (which, however, should better be renamed "properties"), with "placed before", "usually placed before", "placed after", "usually placed after" and "placed before or after" as options. 2020-11-03, Fiable.biz.
Statistics about Omegawiki's evolution
I suggest to publish, in addition to the statistics currently published, statistics for the last year, so that we can see which languages are most active, and the general health status of the project. Fiable.biz 2020-11-26
- Not a bad idea, @Fiable.biz Publish where: social media, special nameSpace, more locations? #dtv
- Anyways Happy Holidays readers & writers of OmegaWiki
- Klaas `Z4␟` V: 14:59, 23 December 2020 (CET)
- There: Special:Ow_statistics. Happy Christmas everybody! Fiable.biz 2020-12-23.
Why has the signature button disappeared from the editing tab of this page? Fiable.biz 2020-12-23.
- You may sign by typing 4 times a tilde: ~~~~ Klaas `Z4␟` V: 22:43, 23 December 2020 (CET)
I've just discovered that Kip shifted, on 2019-03-04, from "The GNU Free Documentation License 1.2 or higher, Creative Commons Attribution License 2.5 or higher" to CC0 (public domain), and then just mentioned this in this International beer parlour: "Words and translations cannot be copyrighted, and it is dubious whether definitions could, so anyway this is the license that makes sense.". Of course original definitions can be, and are copyrighted. Most pictures from Wikimedia commons are copyrighted. The same way combining not copyrighted words to produce an original sentence or text leads to a copyright, combining definitions, translations in different languages, a picture, a categorisation in Wikimedia commons, examples of usage, etymology, hypernym etc. to produce an original record or page leads to a copyright. Even, in rare cases, original word translations are copyrighted. For instance the famous novel "Wuthering Heights" has been translated into French under several titles, the most famous being "Les Hauts de Hurle-vent"; later another publisher used and modified a bit the same title: "Hurelevents" (just one neologism) for another translation of the same book and was condemned by a French court on the ground that "Les Hauts de Hurle-vent" was an original translation of the English title. Although the English original had already fallen into the public domain, the French translation had not.
Moreover databases contents are protected in many countries (for instance in the European Union) even if their records, one by one, cannot be copyrighted: in such a case one can copy a few records, but not copy a large part of the database without the owners consent. The change made by Kip is illegal: we cannot suddenly distribute the work of our contributors on a basis different from the one which was previously agreed, except if all contributors and copyright holders (for contributors who died) agree. Moreover we often copied material from licensed sources, specially from Wiktionary, shared under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike license or a GNU license. We cannot distribute their work with a more permissive license without the consent of them all. We could only change the game rules for contributions posterior to 2019-03-04, but then, we would not be authorized to copy from Wiktionary, Wikimedia commons (except work tagged "public domain") or other open sources any more. I personally strongly disagree with this shift: I have no problem if someone uses and sell these data, but I don't want some entity (usually a big company like Google) to merge our work with its own and then sell me the result, or provide for it under its own conditions (like advertisements), except if it also allows me to use freely its work. Fiable.biz (talk) 03:57, 25 February 2021 (CET)