Erik Moeller wrote: > A compromise could acknowledge the principle that attribution should > never be unreasonably onerous explicitly (a principle which, as Geni > has pointed out, is arguably already encoded in the CC-BY-SA license's > "reasonable to the medium or means" provision), commit us to work > together to provide attribution records of manageable length using > smart algorithms as well as documenting minimally complex attribution > implementations, and permit by-URL attribution in circumstances where > we don't have a better answer yet. I worry, in this scenario, about > instruction and complexity creep over time, so the fundamental > principles of simplicity would need to be articulated well. I think it would help, when using algorithms or any form of "wikiblame" system that might get implemented, to make that an explicit part of the attribution documentation. For example, "Authors of the current version of Article X, according to the wikiblame tool, include A, B, C, D, and E, for additional details and a complete list of contributors see http://ar.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Article X&action=history." (Where "current version" means whatever revision is being reproduced. The language could easily be tweaked for derivative works.) Then if there are any questions, people can refer to, examine, and potentially improve the tool.
--Michael Snow _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
