On 16 Mar 2009, at 00:55, Michael Snow wrote: > Can we please drop the nonsense that a URL is "no attribution at > all" in > an offline context? I've made this point before, but URLs do not > suddenly become devoid of meaning just because you're using a medium > where you can't follow a hyperlink. I could just as soon say that > print > media aren't acceptable sources for Wikipedia articles because you > can't > check them by following a hyperlink, it's the same logic. We allow > references that adapt the conventions of other media to our > context, we > should allow people using other media the same privilege in > adapting our > conventions to their context. > > --Michael Snow
The issue, from my point of view*, is that they do "suddenly become devoid of meaning" as soon as those links stop working. This can happen for a number of reasons, including article moves, deletions, and (<insert deity> forbid) wikipedia.org going away. There are no guarantees that I'm aware of that the links will continue to work for even a decade, let alone the full length of copyright (and, given the tendency to attribute authors even for PD works, afterwards). On the other hand, a local copy of the author list (normally) stays accessible as long as the work does. How does the WMF plan to tackle this problem if attribution-by-link is used? Mike Peel * Note that these points have been raised several times before on this mailing list, but I've yet to see an adequate response, so I figure they deserve raising again. _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
