<br><br><div><span class="gmail_quote">2007/9/26, Magnus Manske &lt;<a href="mailto:magnusmanske@googlemail.com">magnusmanske@googlemail.com</a>&gt;:</span><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
On 9/26/07, Barcex &lt;<a href="mailto:barcexwiki@gmail.com">barcexwiki@gmail.com</a>&gt; wrote:<br>&gt;<br>&gt; Magnus:<br>&gt;<br>&gt;&nbsp;&nbsp;Does cc-sa exist?&nbsp;&nbsp;cc-by-sa &quot;similar license&quot; should be another cc-license?
<br><br>Apparently it does, but it seems to be a CC-BY-SA alias:<br><a href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/">http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/</a><br><br>I&#39;ll remove it later, unless I forget, or someone edits the SVG first...
<br><br>Magnus<br></blockquote></div><br>&nbsp;&nbsp; I see it existed, we have about 3000 images licenced with cc-sa-1.0 <a href="http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Category:CC-SA-1.0">http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Category:CC-SA-1.0
</a><br><br>&nbsp;&nbsp; Anyway, I suggest not to include that license in the diagram in order to simplify it, if possible.<br><br>&nbsp; Barcex<br><br>