User talk:Drdee

Hi Drdee, I'm interested in taking part in discussions about page metadata, but I'm not sure how much I'm ready to be the main one who comes up with proposed implementations, solicits comments, pushes for specific ideas at the architecture meetings, etc. Is that the responsibility I'm taking on by being listed as the author, or is that just for historical information? I'm not even really the original author of that page; I just promoted it to RFC.

It seems that WMF already has some ideas for how it wants to implement page metadata and is already working on it. I was unaware of that when I made it an RFC and in fact, I tried to demote it from being an RFC when I found out it was already on the roadmap. But it was reinstated on the grounds that when decisions are made to go forward, an RFC remains listed as an RFC, just in a different section of the RFC page.

I thought Wikidata was going to be the way forward on metadata, anyway? Or maybe SMW? In the meantime, and for those wikis that won't have their own Wikidata installation, there probably should be a metadata table. Some would say we already have such tables (e.g. I've (mis)used (Extension:BedellPenDragon) and  (Extension:InterwikiMap) for such purposes). I don't have a lot of ideas about what the optimal structure of the metadata table should be, though, or whether there should be more than one of them, with different structures, to serve different purposes. Leucosticte (talk) 17:08, 22 November 2013 (UTC)


 * Hi Leucosticte,

I don't think you are committing to the actual implementation if you are the author of the RFC, so if you could help shepherd the RFC to a good-enough state that would be awesome, else I could do that as well. Drdee (talk) 19:08, 25 November 2013 (UTC)