[Refactored because top-posting is evil.] > On Sat, Dec 12, 2009 at 6:50 PM, Brian McNeil wrote:
> On Sat, 2009-12-12 at 18:27 -0700, bawolff wrote: > >> It'd go like this: Client loads page, page asks toolserver what > >> rating > >> of source is, toolserver asks newstrust (possibly caching results). Reminder: I'm wanting the url parameter and publisher name sent to NewsTrust. Ideally Wikinews is displaying the sourced-from article's rating. If they don't have one, or a very small number of reviews, it falls back to the publisher's more general rating. We do want to pick out where a normally good publisher spits out a dud. > >> I assume that'd take care of privacy issues > > > > I do worry how much work that would impose on NewsTrust. There would > > need to be some sort of API on their end to serve requests up with > > needed data. > > > > It would also make having a "mission critical" Toolserver box essential. > > I know how flaky the toolserve has historically been. We can't rely on > > what's there for stuff appearing in published main namespace content. > > > > In any case, we'd need to be sending the following information to > > NewsTrust from the Toolserver: > > > > article URL > > source name > > if an initial request, or periodic polling > > > > It'd need to return > > > > any rating they have for the article > > an indicator there rating is for the article > > the number of reviews for the article > > any rating they have for the source > > the number of reviews for the source > > > > If a periodic polling, NewsTrust could return some sort of "no change" > > indicator. > > > > This would be flexible enough that Wikinews could collect the > > information on our own articles and stay within the privacy policy and > > the WMF techies paranoia about cross-site scripting attacks. > Ideally if we did use the toolserver as an intermediary, it'd cache > responses, so not to overload newstrust (and script on wikinews end > would fail gracefully if toolserver has downtime). I'm factoring in an "unchanged" response instead of a large blob of XML. This way we can minimise the load put on NewsTrust and keep the data current. I don't want too long a delay between someone reviewing an article on NewsTrust and that being reflected anywhere the data is displayed on Wikinews. It encourages readers both to look at these things on NewsTrust *and* to check Wikinews articles more than once. A last point I'd be really keen to go over with Kul in the office is how the Foundation itself, as opposed to a semi-independent project effort, could partner with NewsTrust. Few points on that: The Wikinews logo is a registered mark. NewsTrust could use it under fair-use provisions but an actual in-writing agreement would be far, far better - and more *transparent*. The Foundation has, as far as I know, done a few select deals with the Wikipedia logo. If I recall correctly, one of the Spanish ISPs has a deal to do a portal into Wikipedia content. I think that would involve private data sharing. Can a similar deal be drawn up with NewsWire? Is it, perhaps, just as simple as specific clauses in NewsTrust's privacy policy and terms of use? -- Brian McNeil <[email protected]>|http://en.wikinews.org/wiki/Brian_McNeil Content of this message in no way represents the opinions or official position of the Wikimedia Foundation or any of its projects. * Problems replying? Forward bounces to [email protected] to raise with Godaddy Hosting.
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ Wikinews-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikinews-l
