[Foundation-l] GFDL Q&A update and question

[Michael Peel]

On 8 Jan 2009, at 22:16, Thomas Dalton wrote:
>
> I don't think that's clear at all. I don't know how many authors you
> are meant to attribute things to under CC-BY-SA, it may well be all of
> them. I need to do more research (or, I need someone to tell me the
> answer!).

My preference would be: all authors that have contributed to the  
article, where that contribution has not been reverted, unless the  
authors say that they don't want to be attributed. There is a large  
amount of leeway here, though: I think even "Wikipedia" would satisfy  
the license, or on the other scale a complete list of every editor of  
the wiki. The WMF really needs to state up front what the attribution  
should be before we have the vote / start using the license (assuming  
we do).

Note that for the GFDL the requirement is that five (or all if less  
than 5) of the principle authors of the document (which I would  
interpret as an article) should be attributed.

Personally, for everything I've written, and any photograph I've  
taken, I want to be attributed when it is / they are used, with the  
option to waive the attribution if I dislike the usage of it. That  
applies both to content I've submitted to Wikipedia et al., and in  
general to anything else I do. I'm happy for that attribution to be  
relegated to an "et al." in the case of being one author among many,  
where my contributions are less than the N authors being attributed.

Mike Peel