On Sunday 11 October 2009 20:39:48 Juiceman wrote: > On Sun, Oct 11, 2009 at 3:33 AM, Cl?ment <cvollet at gmail.com> wrote: > > On Saturday 10 October 2009 23:53:52 Matthew Toseland wrote: > >> On Thursday 08 October 2009 00:49:11 Cl?ment wrote: > >> > Hello, I felt bored tonight, so I wrote this. > >> > > >> > This is just a beginning, but in order to have a good UI, we need to > >> > adress those questions with all the attention they deserve. In > >> > particular, the raison d'etre (why a new UI?) and the model of the user > >> > (what is our target audience?). > >> > >> This is logical. > >> > >> > FREENET UI > >> > > >> > => Raison d'etre: > >> > > >> > "To allow the user to access all (or the more of) the services provided > >> > by a Freenet node. > >> > >> Or the functionality that they will commonly want to use, with the rest > >> ?being provided by third party tools etc? > >> > > Sure > >> > Current limitations: > >> > - A lot of users complain about Freenet being complicated to use > >> > >> Freenet is complicated, period. Many important things about Freenet are > >> ?hard to safely simplify. :( > >> > > Well, we should find out which things are hard to simplify : are they > > essential > > to use Freenet ? > > I started coding a "help" servlet for Freenet, accessible if you go to > http://127.0.0.1:8888/help > but became discouraged when I had to start worrying about licensing > issues with copy pasting text from the various Freenet wikis. My > original idea was to use the l10n language files to contain the > information and allow translation, but it is an ugly kludge and would > only allow translation of English to other languages keeping the exact > same formatting and wouldn't allow other languages to be expanded > beyond without editing the code of Freenet itself and not just a text > file.
Licensing is a pain. However, we are making a new wiki, and we can simply declare prominently that the wiki is licensed under a particular GPL-compatible license? Of course then we can't use the stuff on the old wiki, which has no such license declaration. Thoughts? I don't see why formatting needs to be a problem however. We have methods to add strings with substitutions so that both generated text and minor formatting can be moved around by translators. > > It was my desire that the information be accessible even if a node > couldn't connect or was in a secluded darknet that couldn't reach a > Freesite in the main network. Right. > > A better way I now believe would be to ship html files as part of the > node, with the node loading the local pages like it was a Freesite, > only I don't know how to code that. It also doesn't answer my > licensing questions. Yes. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 835 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part. URL: <https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/devl/attachments/20100108/a2c6c669/attachment.pgp>
