2009/2/19 Robert Rohde <rarohde(a)gmail.com>om>:
In my opinion, it is incumbent upon us to give
examples of how we
believe third parties can legally and practically reuse WMF content by
exercising rights under CC-BY-SA. If we can't, in our collective
wisdom, agree on how third parties ought to be able to accomplish that
under the new license, then the license is probably inadequate for our
Now we don't have to cover every way that CC-BY-SA might be used. And
we don't have to go through every possible complication that might
occur with wiki content. But I do think we must be prepared to give
concrete examples of how the license may be used in common
applications, and that requires being willing to confront the question
of "reasonable" attribution.
If someone comes to us and says: "I want to print a copy of [[France]]
in my book. What is a reasonable way to comply with the license?",
then we really ought to be able to answer that question. If we can't
agree on an acceptable answer to that question under CC-BY-SA, then we
probably shouldn't be considering adopting it.
For the record, I am open to the idea that we might well be able to
get nearly everyone to agree on a set of "reasonable" usage guidelines
consistent with the terms and spirit of CC-BY-SA, but I agree with
Thomas that it is important that we address that either before or
concurrent with the relicensing effort.
Excellently put, I agree 100%.