Reading/Strategy/Problem 2 Choice

From MediaWiki.org
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Framing a Choice for Problem 2

Problem 2:

When users access content through third parties we:

  • Can’t measure user value
  • Don’t get contributors or donors
  • Can’t ensure content is displayed in line with our values

Guidelines:

  • Articulate strategic choices we could make that would cause Problem 2 to go away.
  • Choices should be mutually exclusive.
  • Choices are more general than possibilities, which narrow the choices.
  • Please initial your choices so we know who to contact for more info.
  • Please plan to share your choices by COB (PT) Sep 17


Choice1: Restrict API usage Possibilities:

  • Like anyone else: Create terms of use for our API and enforce third parties to be in compliance with!
  • Third parties are required to add link to original article in same text size of article, in on the same article page.
  • A WP note, link to an about WP page is to be added to footnote
  • Third parties are required to re-direct traffic (every nth page, or one redirect per session)
  • Ensure WMF do the same of the above for Wikidata.
  • Third parties are required to ensure anonymity in data collection ( ha ha haah!)

...looks like all the above can be included in the created terms of use

  • Use PR and the foundation's public goodwill to get large for profit entity to use a more restricted/trackable API

Choice 2: Limit API usage to partnerships initiated by WMF, only. QUESTION: When we say "API" we may be referring to MediaWiki APIs, database dumps, screenscraping, and so on, correct? Possibilities

  • WMF becomes a partner in every product that uses WM content, with room to add preferences to design/ request features..etc
  • WMF initiates a program for creative use of our API and let others do more products for us :)

Choice 3: Require an API key for all queries Possibilities:

   * We will be able to measure usage of our content
   * You will be able to identify popular services that use our APIS and what for
   * You will be able to engage in conversations with owners of popular services and have conversations around issues with content/requests for edit links etc..
   * Does not require restricting API usage. No need for capping usage.
   

Choice 4: Focus on making the experience of our content better

   * (Maybe I don't understand this choice well enough - TN)
  • If we improve our experience there is less need for things such as Wikiwand to exist, thus we wouldn't need to care so much about people using our APIs to access content.
   * Create an "premium API" which will be good enough for our partners to use and perhaps even pay for
  • Analytics
  • Metadata (page views, edits, popularity, etc)
  • Customization
  • Ease of use (simpler API)

//This choice is extremely radical, and here more as a straw man than a practical choice Choice 5: Remove all support for non-WMF hosted content presentations of community content and provide iframes and embeds which syndicators are required to use Possibilities:

    * Change the legal terms of Wiki content
    * build a set of services which deliver pixel level content (ie. iframes)

Risks:

   * We'd need to have service level agreements
   * Possibly gainst values/existing license as we wouldn't be open