Wikidata:Property proposal/official server list URL

official server list URL

Originally proposed at Wikidata:Property proposal/Computing

   Done: official server list URL (P12634) (Talk and documentation)

Description	website, officially recommended by the developer of the software, that lists public server instances of the software
Data type	URL
Domain	items that are instances of server software (Q1371279)
Example 1	MediaWiki (Q83) → https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Sites_using_MediaWiki
Example 2	Wikibase (Q16354758) → https://wikibase-registry.wmflabs.org/
Example 3	Mastodon (Q27986619) → https://joinmastodon.org/servers
Example 4	PeerTube (Q50938515) → https://instances.joinpeertube.org/
Example 5	Pixelfed (Q60691545) → https://pixelfed.org/servers
Example 6	diaspora* (Q1973097) → https://diaspora.fediverse.observer/
Example 7	Friendica (Q1464506) → https://dir.friendica.social/servers
Example 8	SearXNG (Q107341994) → https://searx.space/
Example 9	other software that is part of (P361) fediverse (Q30325419) is very likely to have such a list as well
See also	official demo URL (P11201)
Wikidata project	WikiProject Computer Science (Q6526225), WikiProject Websites (Q15831464)

Motivation

We recently introduced official demo URL (P11201). For software that is federated and/or privacy-sensitive developers often times do not want to promote a specific instance of their software and instead refer their users to a website listing public server instances. So it would be nice to have a property to link such websites.

--Push-f (talk) 16:49, 15 November 2022 (UTC)

Discussion

• julle (talk) wd-Ryan (talk/edits) Arlo Barnes (talk) WT20 (talk) Zblace (talk) applsdev RampantSpirit (talk)
  Notified participants of WikiProject Websites. --Push-f (talk) 16:53, 15 November 2022 (UTC)
• Does this count for Discord? https://discord.com/guild-discovery -wd-Ryan (Talk/Edits) 16:54, 15 November 2022 (UTC)

  Very good question. I'd say no since "Discord servers" are technically not separate instances of the Discord software. Technically discord.com is a single server instance (Q115217689). It would probably make sense to add that statement with a deprecated rank, since it's very likely that it would otherwise be added. --Push-f (talk) 17:00, 15 November 2022 (UTC)

  :(  Support. -wd-Ryan (Talk/Edits) 17:06, 15 November 2022 (UTC)

•  Comment I'm not sure if the nomenclature isn't too restrictive here. Wouldn't we want to be able to link to e.g. GitLab instances or MediaWiki installations? --Waldyrious (talk) 17:48, 15 November 2022 (UTC)

  That GitLab page does not link GitLab instances directly but instead just links the websites of projects using GitLab, so I think it indeed does not match the intended purpose. mw:Sites using MediaWiki however fits the description and I would say can be regarded as official since mediawiki.org is the official documentation website of MediaWiki and the page was created by Erik Möller (Q577729), a former Deputy Director of the Wikimedia Foundation. --Push-f (talk) 18:51, 15 November 2022 (UTC)

  MediaWiki (Q83) doesn't seem to be an instance of server software (Q1371279), so either that or the domain needs to change. -wd-Ryan (Talk/Edits) 18:57, 15 November 2022 (UTC)

  Good catch! I have made wiki software (Q6686945) a subclass of server software (Q1371279) so now MediaWiki (Q83) is an instance of it :) --Push-f (talk) 19:28, 15 November 2022 (UTC)

  I'm still unsure about the "server" terminology. And the omission of the GitLab list is another point in favor of a broader concept, I think. It feels like being pedantic to say that their list doesn't point to instances of GitLab, just because it links indirectly to the instance, via the project site (I do agree it would be preferable if they did link to them, and furthermore if they separated self-hosted instances from those hosted at gitlab.com, but still.)

  On the other hand, it is true that most GitLab instances hosted on separate servers are not open to any project, with the (partial) exception of some broader projects like GNOME. I'm not sure if this should be a deal-breaker since many servers of Fediverse projects aren't open anyway, but I thought it would be worth mentioning.

  But this is not something I feel too strongly about. I just thought I'd push back a bit on the naming, but if you still think it makes sense as is, I'll heed your stance. Waldyrious (talk) 19:49, 15 November 2022 (UTC)

  I think it makes sense as is. That GitLab page is very much a mess. Many links are dead, several listed projects apparently don't even use GitLab and only link GitHub and other projects aren't servers but just repos on github.com. --Push-f (talk) 20:25, 15 November 2022 (UTC)

  @Waldyrious:, would you like to give your opinion? Regards, ZI Jony ^(Talk) 05:23, 25 January 2024 (UTC)

  Thanks for the ping. I don't have additional feedback to add, really. As I said above, "if you still think it makes sense as is, I'll heed your stance", and Push-f did reply "I think it makes sense as is", so as far as I'm concerned, we can consider this segment of the discussion settled. Waldyrious (talk) 14:55, 25 January 2024 (UTC)

•  Support Laftp0 (talk) 23:14, 15 November 2022 (UTC)
•  Oppose I think the closest label to what has been proposed here would be "fediverse instance list URL" or something to that effect. I cringe at the term fediverse (Q30325419) but it does appear to be closest matching item/Wikipedia article. My reason for opposing this property proposal is that I find it hard to separate fediverse (Q30325419) from other non-trendy and non-buzzwordy distributed computing systems such as a list of servers forming an IRC network, or a list of VPN tunnel endpoints for a VPN service, or a list of DNS root nameservers, or a list of public NTP servers, or a list of Tor nodes, or a list of autonomous systems of the Internet, etc. "Fediverse" instances which are federated together could be viewed as being part of (P361) a distributed computing system (even if there is no central organisation managing or gatekeeping it) and thus this property proposal in generic sense is effectively a "parts list URL". Outside of distributed computing, a "parts list URL" property could be used to state that PinePhone (Q80443980) has a parts list at URL of https://wiki.pine64.org/wiki/PinePhone_component_list. If "parts list URL" was proposed perhaps that is something I could get support and get behind. Another example could be DNS root zone (Q849163) having a "parts list URL" of https://www.iana.org/domains/root/servers. --Dhx1 (talk) 11:55, 17 November 2022 (UTC)

  @Dhx1: No, the proposed property is not in any way specific to the Fediverse, as you could have noticed by looking at examples 1, 2 and 8, neither of which are part of the "Fediverse".

  The proposed property is meant to be used to connect a piece of server software to a website listing instances of said software.

  This is very much different from a "parts list URL" because instances of a software are most certainly not a part of the software.

  --Push-f (talk) 12:18, 17 November 2022 (UTC)

  @Push-f My reason for suggesting the "has part" relationship is relevant is because Mastodon (Q27986619) is a combination of software, a global federated social network and a federation standard/set of protocols. Thus Mastodon (Q27986619) should seemingly be split into three items. The federated social network item would consist of multiple parts which are generally instances of the Mastodon (Q27986619) software, but could conceivably also include as parts instances of other software too that implementation of (P4428) the common federation standard/protocols. Dhx1 (talk) 22:59, 17 November 2022 (UTC)

  @Dhx1: Yes instances that implement ActivityPub can be regarded as part of the "Fediverse", however that is irrelevant to this proposal, which is explicitly about linking server software to websites listing instances of said software. The fact that a Mastodon user can follow a PeerTube user does not change anything about:

  • Mastodon (Q27986619)official server list URLhttps://joinmastodon.org/servers
  • PeerTube (Q50938515)official server list URLhttps://instances.joinpeertube.org/

  I guess you are suggesting something like:

  • fediverse (Q30325419)parts list URLhttps://joinmastodon.org/serverssoftware engine (P408)Mastodon (Q27986619)
  • fediverse (Q30325419)parts list URLhttps://instances.joinpeertube.org/software engine (P408)PeerTube (Q50938515)

  however that in my opinion is just a strictly worse way of modelling these relationships.

  --Push-f (talk) 06:41, 18 November 2022 (UTC)

  Mastodon (what most people would know it as) is an instance of federated social network (Q111381667) that consists of numerous nodes which are generally using Mastodon software (Q7397) (but could also contain nodes using different software perhaps sometimes just a minor fork of the official software). Mastodon gGmbH the organization (Q43229) is the primary developer of Mastodon software (Q7397) and they publish an online list of nodes that form the primary and publicly used Mastodon federated social network (Q111381667). Hence what I'm suggesting is a URL for a list of nodes of the primary and public Mastodon federated social network (Q111381667), perhaps with a qualifier to state that the list is maintained by Mastodon gGmbH organization (Q43229), and perhaps other qualifiers to note the inclusion criteria for the list (such as nodes must operate Mastodon software (Q7397) and not alternative or forked software). Mastodon (Q27986619) is similar to PEPPOL (Q1585098) (and other federated networks) in that there is a primary federated network everyone knows and uses, but it doesn't prohibit someone from setting up an alternative and standalone federated network using the same software and specifications. Dhx1 (talk) 01:13, 1 December 2022 (UTC)

•  Comment In the meantime, official list URL (P12388) has been created, and used at e.g. Discord server (Q63198389) to the described effect. I wonder if this would be a more general property, that could also cover the cases originally presented here. --Schmidt Fu (talk) 23:27, 5 February 2024 (UTC)
  • Indeed this proposal and P12388 are related, but the relation is not direct. P12388 are meant to list concrete instances of an item (the examples include some types of documents). But we can't use this property in elements like 'Diaspora' or 'Wikibase', since we can't have 'instances of Diaspora' or 'instances of MediaWiki' ('instance' being 'a concrete example of a class, the relation expressed by P31), we should create an item for 'server instances' that links to the software using P2283 (Q109977407 as example), and use P12388 in this item, since we can have examples of 'instances of Mastodon'. --Tinker Bell ★ ♥ 10:22, 14 April 2024 (UTC)
• @Push-f, Wd-Ryan, Waldyrious, Laftp0, Dhx1, Schmidt Fu:, and Tinker Bell  Done as official server list URL (P12634). Regards, ZI Jony ^(Talk) 13:17, 18 April 2024 (UTC)