On Sat, Jul 12, 2014 at 12:22 AM, Gergo Tisza <gtisza(a)wikimedia.org> wrote:
On Fri, Jul 11, 2014 at 3:58 AM, Todd Allen
<toddmallen(a)gmail.com> wrote:
That doesn't, however, help the concern that
millions of users are
pulling
up the images without immediately seeing the license requirements and
author information.
To the contrary, Media Viewer displays the license, author and source as an
always visible part of the image. On a typical file page, you have to
scroll down to find any of this information; most users won't do that, if
what they are looking for is the image, and that is available without
scrolling. (It is well known in web usability
<http://www.nngroup.com/articles/scrolling-and-attention/> that relatively
little attention is given to things above the fold; one of the main
benefits of Media Viewer is that it brings the most important things above
it.)
Agree. The best practices for "marking a work" is to "*make sure that the
license information is clearly visible underneath (or otherwise next to)
the image." [1] [2]*
*1. **http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Marking_your_work_with_a_CC_license
<http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Marking_your_work_with_a_CC_license>*
*2.
http://www.newmediarights.org/guide/how_to/creative_commons/best_practices_…
<http://www.newmediarights.org/guide/how_to/creative_commons/best_practices_creative_commons_attributions>*
*Unfortunately our "file description page" give more importance for subject
description and bury the attribution parameters in a negligible location.
As a result most reuses end up with an attribution, "Credit:Wiki[m/p]edia".
:(*
*Jee*