On Sat, May 26, 2012 at 1:45 AM, Erik Moeller erik@wikimedia.org wrote:
On Fri, May 25, 2012 at 4:36 PM, aude aude.wiki@gmail.com wrote:
I don't know if anything changed with the license selector part of the
code
and interface, but I tried uploading some maps (from OpenStreetMap) with the upload wizard. More than once, I completely missed the license selection part (e.g. not see it, not fill it out).
Checking your recent uploads on Commons, I see two: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Location_map_Washington_DC.png
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Locator_Map_of_Washington_DC,_May_20...
I deleted a few others that were mistakes (wrong map extents), and the second one above is also a mistake.
One was not uploaded through UW but through the "upload new file" mechanism. The other was uploaded without license with the license provided later.
You cannot skip the "Release rights" step, but you can choose "I believe this work is freely licensed or legally in the public domain. I understand that if I do not add the necessary licensing information in a timely fashion, the file may be deleted."
Okay, that's what happened. I think just intuitively I was looking for form fields to fill out (text boxes, select/combo boxes) and was expecting to see a drop down box for license selection.
Maybe the current layout works for some people though.
Now that I look again, I see the "copyright tags" link for expert users. (missed it before) That's helpful and allows skipping a couple steps. Maybe it could be bold?
This will lead to {{subst:uwl}} on the description page, which what I see here.
I don't necessarily mind this for the expert option, but since we know
the
source is openstreetmap.org (from what I put in the source field),
wouldn't
it be nice if it automatically suggested CC-BY-SA 2.0 license. Or if the source is .gov, then suggest public domain. [of course, also be able to override it like a combo box]
Perhaps. Detecting common cases would be nice -- but each one requires special care. Go ahead and file a bug for OSM license detection; we might be able to get to it at least in the long run.
It would be nice to have for sure.
Also knowing to put a link in the source field (if it's something obtained online) is not obvious unless you know from experience of how the information is turned into the template.
Cheers, Katie
-- Erik Möller VP of Engineering and Product Development, Wikimedia Foundation
Support Free Knowledge: https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Donate
Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l