W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-wai-rd@w3.org > February 2012

Re: suggestion for "Copyright Policy" section

From: giorgio brajnik <brajnik@uniud.it>
Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2012 09:17:40 +0100
Message-ID: <4F45F624.7080203@uniud.it>
To: simon.harper@manchester.ac.uk
CC: Shadi Abou-Zahra <shadi@w3.org>, Yeliz Yesilada <yyeliz@metu.edu.tr>, Peter Thiessen <peterdev001@gmail.com>, RDWG <public-wai-rd@w3.org>
Why don't we try as an exercise to write some example of references?

How would you refer to the research note[1]?
and how to the paper by Nietzio et al[2]?

My suggestion is something like

[1] M. Vigo, G. Brajnik and J. O'Connor, Research note on Web 
Accessibility Metrics, 2012. In Website Accessibility Metrics, Online 
Symposium 5 December 2011, http://www.w3.org/WAI/RD/2011/metrics (and 
the URL of the research note itself)

[2] A Niezio, M Eibegger, M. Goodwin, M Snaprud, Towards a score 
function for WCAG 2.0 benchmarking, 2011. In Website Accessibility 
Metrics, Online Symposium 5 December 2011, 
http://www.w3.org/WAI/RD/2011/metrics (and link to 
http://www.w3.org/WAI/RD/2011/metrics/paper11)

or, alternatively:

[2] A Niezio, M Eibegger, M. Goodwin, M Snaprud, Towards a score 
function for WCAG 2.0 benchmarking, 2011. In Proc. of Website 
Accessibility Metrics, Online Symposium 5 December 2011, Vigo, Brajnik, 
O'Connor (eds.), http://www.w3.org/WAI/RD/2011/metrics (and link to 
http://www.w3.org/WAI/RD/2011/metrics/paper11)


The reason for having the note is to provide context and some 
interpretation of results.

   Giorgio


On 02/23/2012 08:47 AM, Simon Harper wrote:
> Hi everyone,
>
> So for me I feel that if we accept a paper we should include it -
> otherwise we should not accept it. Further, the argument that
> publications included as part of the site, ie on the web are as citable
> as the note - just doesn't hold up. I see the note as the proceedings of
> the seminar. In this case we could have 2 sections the first being by
> the editors, the second being each paper - referenced as a proceedings.
> If the site has the same status as the note then why do we have a note
> at all?
>
> cheers
>
> Si.
>
> PS I check my email at 08:00 and 17:00 GMT. If you require a faster
> response please include the word 'fast' in the subject line.
>
> =======================
> Simon Harper
> http://simon.harper.name/about/card/
>
> University of Manchester (UK)
> Web Ergonomics Lab - Information Management Group
> http://wel.cs.manchester.ac.uk
>
>
> On 22/02/12 22:31, Shadi Abou-Zahra wrote:
>> Ref: <http://www.w3.org/WAI/RD/wiki/Talk:Mobile_Pre_CFP>
>>
>> Instead of: "Accepted papers will be published - in attributable form
>> - as part of the proceedings and in the ensuing publication, which
>> will be published using the W3C Document License."
>>
>> Consider: "Accepted papers will be published as part of the
>> proceedings. Accepted papers may also be referenced or included (in
>> full or in part) in attributable form in the ensuing publication,
>> which will be published using the W3C Document License."
>>
>> Thoughts?
>>
>> Best,
>> Shadi
>>
>
Received on Thursday, 23 February 2012 08:18:20 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 23 February 2012 08:18:20 GMT