Mark Gallagher wrote:
G'day Nick,
Alphax (Wikipedia email) wrote:
Please *don't* just use the GFDL for photos. Use a Creative Commons Attribution license instead of, or together with the GFDL.
Why?
Because the GFDL is bloody awful. CC-BY-SA gives all the advantages, to both content creators and users, without the unnecessary overhead and the strange feeling that one ought to be frothing at the mouth and bad-mouthing "Micro$oft" that always occurs when one attempts to use the GFDL.
I agree with images, and with many instances of text, but the GFDL is still IMO the best choice for the purpose it was designed for, Free books. It balances the freedoms of allowing others to modify and redistribute the content with some protection for the original author in the form of the history sections, front-cover and back-cover texts, and so on. Although i do agree that it's unnecessarily cumbersome to have to distribute the entire text of the GFDL rather than pointing to some canonical URL.
-Mark