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