[Foundation-l] Proposed revised attribution language

Thomas Dalton thomas.dalton at gmail.com
Sun Mar 15 02:22:55 UTC 2009

2009/3/15 Jussi-Ville Heiskanen <cimonavaro at gmail.com>:
> I think the practice of using summary lines for attribution
> has from the start been viewed as a temporary solution,
> only to be used until we figure out a better way to handle
> content such as translations from other language projects.
> I think if we do go towards creating an easy link which
> contains a list of editors culled from history with no
> duplicates, it might include a method of externally
> adding attributions into that plain text form, for just
> such translations and imported content from other
> sites, where the content may even have a large list
> of authors itself.

That would be great, if it can be made to work.

> When and if that eventually materializes (next year in Jerusalem;
> yearning for Zion; by and by, lord; when the lion shall lie down
> with the lamb - insert your own religious affiliations allusion
> to the eternal return here) naturally the summaries should
> be purged and the attributions temporarily lodged there
> given their proper place. I could even imagine some
> semi-automated method that would while stripping off
> the summaries, simultaneously scrape off the urls and
> wikilinks in them and for good measure append them
> to the list of editors.

Unfortunately there is no standard way of writing attribution edit
summaries, so automation is going to be difficult. Semi-automation, as
you say, might be possible for those summaries that include links (a
person would need to determine if they are attributions, but that's
easy enough - a couple of seconds a summary with a decent number of
people helping out could get it done is a reasonable amount of time),
but what about content taken from offline sources? Probably extremely
rare, but can we risk failing to correctly attribute even one or two

More information about the foundation-l mailing list