On 12/8/05, Fastfission <fastfission(a)gmail.com> wrote:
My crystal-ball prediction is that someday we'll
end up with a
modified (though GFDL-compatible) license, WFDL or something like
that, more tailored to our needs. But of course we don't know all of
our current much less future needs, so it would be hasty to worry
about that too much now, I think.
Lawrence Lessig, working through Creative Commons, annouced on
cc-lessigletter that he is "launching a project to facilitate
interoperability among sufficiently compatible license types." I'd
strongly recommend the newsletter to anyone interested in these sorts
of things. It's a once a week letter so it's low traffic and usually
fairly interesting. The last edition talked about how "Erik Möller
argues against the use of a Creative Commons NonCommercial (NC)
license" and how "content licensed under a NC license can't be
included within Wikipedia."
As an aside, I'm not sure trying to make MediaWiki
bend backwards to
accommodate the GFDL's more intricate interpretations is the right way
to go either.
FF
I don't really think so either. I was more responding to Ant's
concern that about being "strip[p]ed of one's authorship". Forgetting
the GFDL completely, there should *still* be a place where people can
go to see a list of the authors of an article (without sifting through
10,000 lines of history just to see the 200 authors, or writing a bot
to do so). If we're going to make this, we might as well add in the
years and the titles and make it GFDL compatible to boot.
Anthony