On Thu, Jan 22, 2009 at 8:43 PM, Michael Snow <wikipedia(a)verizon.net> wrote:
I'm afraid I simply don't understand what
you're trying to say, then. It
sounded like you were talking about having one document (web, print,
whatever medium) point to another, something that might be done for
attribution or a variety of other purposes. And if it's a question of
pointing, I'm puzzled what difference it makes which medium is used or
which direction one points across different media.
I'm also not sure what you mean by a right to demand a printed legal
document. It sounds sort of like you're referring to this as a right you
hold as an author (whether as part of basic copyright or a moral right).
That's not something I'm familiar with at all. So it's likely that I've
not understood what you mean correctly there, either.
No, I am referring to my right as a user of the content. (Implicitly,
it is about my right as an author of the content, but, explicitly, it
I'll try to be more formal in explaining:
1) There is a set of extended informations which I may get:
* For example, I may ask for some kind of *howto* (note, not an
official recommendations!) document about achieving my legal rights
related to, let's say, building a house.
* I also expect in a contemporary book about, let's say, astronomy, to
refer to some documentation related to, let's say, some places on the
Internet related to the grid computing.
In both cases, strictly speaking, those are extra informations. In
both cases it may be completely reasonable to have it in other form
than a paper one.
2) But, there is a set of basic informations for which I have the
right to get them in the appropriate form:
* For example, legal documents about building a house.
* List of authors of a written document which I am reading (if that
document is not in public domain).
In both cases, I expect that I get them in the most basic form. In
both cases it is a paper form, not an electronic form.
The right of a reader of a book has to be "Send me the list of the
authors [in the paper form]." (and, again, I think that you should
know that better than me). If it is an explicit legal right (and I
don't see a reason why it shouldn't be), then every publisher has the
obligation to send the list of authors to every reader on demand. If
it is not an explicit right, we should make a way how to fulfill this
A couple of months ago, I mentioned that it would be really useful to
have periodicals (let's say, yearly), which would publish the list of
the authors of the content of Wikimedia projects. This is not just
about fulfilling the rights of readers or authors, but this is, also,
a very relevant bibliographic work (maybe the most relevant) of the
contemporary culture. In cooperation with relevant international
institution those bibliographical informations may be available in all
national and a lot of relevant libraries.