Where can I read about what, exactly, the spirit of the GFDL is?
I've already explained why flexible attribution is equivalent to full
attribution in a recent post. It's easy to do the reverse lookup from a
piece of content to its authors. Anyone wanting to know who the content
should be attributed can easily find that out. We can develop tools to make
it easier.
But back to your spirit argument. Why would a CC-Wiki that is more practical
about attribution be against the spirit of the GFDL?
On Tue, Feb 3, 2009 at 10:59 AM, Thomas Dalton <thomas.dalton(a)gmail.com>wrote;wrote:
2009/2/3 Brian <Brian.Mingus(a)colorado.edu>du>:
I would like to see the most flexible attribution
rules possible (just
the
Article Title, Wikipedia perhaps). If Geni's
adamance regarding strict
terms
of attribution is a correct interpretation of the
CC-BY-SA then I can't
see
it as being the correct license for the projects.
Where is the CC-Wiki
license? We have tremendous goodwill with both the FSF and CC, surely we
can
get our own license that applies specifically to
the problems that wikis
face and other content mediums do not.
We can't relicense GFDL works under a license which isn't in the same
spirit, a license which allowed attribution to "Wikipedia" without the
explicit consent of the author wouldn't be in the same spirit.
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l