[mb-style] Wikipedia AR using urls with hash

[Olivier]

2008/3/9, Brian Schweitzer <brian.brianschweitzer at gmail.com>:
>
> I would agree with all three observations, while adding this:
>
>  Theoretically - we don't currently enforce it, nor often do it - but
>  Wikipedia links ought to use the perma-links

Why would we do that?
If I understand correctly, the so-called perma-links in wacky refer to
a specific revision of a page, which doesn't look desirable to link to
(unless we want to stay stuck with old content...).

> , just as we encourage for
>  links to MusicBrainz.
>  Just like technically these both are valid:
>  http://musicbrainz.org/show/release/?releaseid=692673
>  http://musicbrainz.org/release/a0ae2917-9336-4d15-abc9-874a16482c57.html
>  the presented, prefered "permanent" link is actually
>  http://musicbrainz.org/show/permlink.html?id=a0ae2917-9336-4d15-abc9-874a16482c57&type=release
>
>  Wikipedia is the same way.

Err, no :-)

http://musicbrainz.org/show/permlink.html?id=a0ae2917-9336-4d15-abc9-874a16482c57&type=release
is not a specific "revision" of the release state.

Yeah, both MB and wacky have "perma-links", but that's really
different horses (err ponies).


>  While
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tracy_Bonham#In_The_City_.2B_In_The_Woods
>
> works, it is quite unstable.  While
>  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tracy_Bonham also works, it too isn't
>  intended to be a permanent link.  The presented permanent link is:
>  http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Tracy_Bonham&oldid=196063903
>  - and only pages at Wikipedia, not anchors, are assigned such
>  permanent links.
>

I'm not aware of uses of fragment identifiers (in text/html http
context) that return different content (eg: refer to different
resources). Am I wrong assuming that?

Both http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tracy_Bonham and
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tracy_Bonham#In_The_City_.2B_In_The_Woods
refer to the same resource and are equally "valid" as URLs (and
obviously equally stable).
The fragment part of an URI in that context is unspecified (protocol
wise) and its up to the client to interpret it.


>  So, my 2 cents: While we may not enforce that all Wikipedia links have
>  to use the permanent links

*Definitely not* IMHO (please correct me if I'm wrong in assuming that
such permalinks refer to a specific revision of the wacky pages).

>, any link to Wikipedia should theoretically
>  be able to be switched to a permanent link.  As that is universally
>  not true of anchors within Wikipedia pages, I thus think they
>  universally ought to not be linked.

I think you just don't understand what fragments are.
Here's your "permalink" for the URI with the fragment part:
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Tracy_Bonham&oldid=194084452#In_The_City_.2B_In_The_Woods


Anyhow, this is entirely off-topic.

- Olivier