Tomasz Wegrzanowski wrote:
Toby Bartels wrote:
>Karl Wick wrote:
>>(My textbook plans dont include using much from
the WP anyway).
>Now there's a thought ... what if each textbook
project
>decides for itself depending on its own estimation of its needs?
>If a project decides wrongly, then only it has to start over.
>Sitewide policy can be submitted to the public domain,
>or kept under GFDL for copying from Wikipedia.
I think that it would be very unpractical. Keeping
everything GFDL
makes us bidirectionally compatibe with Wikipedia. Changing license
to something else breaks that link.
I think that it's even more impractical to force a decision early.
Does your textbook project plan to use material from Wikipedia?
Then you want the GNU FDL (you'll /need/ it for your plan).
But Karl's doesn't. I doubt that I'd want it either.
Encyclopaedias and textbooks have a quite different style,
and I'd argue that any text that isn't completely rewritten is a mistake.
But I don't have to force my opinion on your textbook project!
Please don't force your opinion on mine (if there is one) or Karl's.
A simple course of action for right now
would be to see what licences we find acceptable
(so far, we have the GNU FDL and Creative Commons BY-SA),
then release material under a disjunction of these.
When a textbook project decides that it wants material
that's previously appeared under a specific one of these,
then it can do so, and restrict its licence appropriately.
-- Toby