Daniel Mayer wrote:
I think that is a very good idea. Otherwise, as you have noted, allowing Anon edits isn't really in the spirit of the GNU FDL.
I couldn't possibly disagree more, I think. *Disallowing* anon edits would not be in the spirit of the GNU FDL. I just don't know where this idea is coming from that the attribution requirement extends beyond the identification that someone actually gives us. It certainly doesn't come from the law, or from the license itself.
I say: the spirit and letter of GNU FDL are best served by doing *exactly* what we are doing. There's no tension at all, and indeed there *is* tension between any *other* alternative.
We are already doing, in this respect, *exactly* what the spirit and letter fo the GNU FDL require, and I really am quite confused by suggestions to the contrary!
--Jimbo