W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webplatform@w3.org > January 2013

Re: Important: Preserve Content Attribution

From: Scott Rowe <scottrowe@google.com>
Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2013 11:01:01 -0800
Message-ID: <CAHZLcPoHaj0s_JXAgfFAtx-MPZ=Y269EWT-V_0tr2rdxLhWuYQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Chris Mills <cmills@w3.org>
Cc: PhistucK <phistuck@gmail.com>, Alex Komoroske <komoroske@google.com>, Eliot Graff <Eliot.Graff@microsoft.com>, Doug Schepers <schepers@w3.org>, "public-webplatform@w3.org" <public-webplatform@w3.org>
Hi all,

In today's telecon I took the action item to update the
Template:External_Attribution_Form_Section<http://docs.webplatform.org/wiki/Template:External_Attribution_Form_Section>to
include an admonition against removing established external
attributions.

You can now see this working when you edit a page and scroll down to the
Attribution section. For example, the AppCache API_Object
page<http://docs.webplatform.org/w/index.php?title=apis/appcache/ApplicationCache&action=formedit>
.

This is how we resolved the issue, instead of trying to implement a locking
mechanism or some such, for the time being.

+Scott



On Tue, Jan 22, 2013 at 8:14 AM, Chris Mills <cmills@w3.org> wrote:

> Or perhaps just check the user's role using PHP (there must be an easily
> query-able flag for that somewhere), and then for non-admins, don't render
> those templates.
>
> If we did it in the client-side, it'd be really easy to overcome using an
> extension, UserJS or other mechanism.
>
> Chris Mills
> Opera Software, dev.opera.com
> W3C Fellow, web education and webplatform.org
> Author of "Practical CSS3: Develop and Design" (http://goo.gl/AKf9M)
>
> On 22 Jan 2013, at 15:59, PhistucK <phistuck@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Is there a way to add a class to <body> (or some other container) with
> the role of the user (user, administrator, blabla)?
> > If so, using CSS, I guess we could just hide that section according to
> the role, assuming -
> > - The ID/class is persistent for that section.
> > - There is an ID/class for a new page form (but maybe we can leverage
> #hash and :target).
> >
> > ☆PhistucK
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Jan 22, 2013 at 5:27 PM, Alex Komoroske <komoroske@google.com>
> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > On Sat, Jan 19, 2013 at 11:06 AM, Eliot Graff <Eliot.Graff@microsoft.com>
> wrote:
> > +1 to Chris' suggestion.
> >
> > Requiring the selection of an attribution property at the time of topic
> creation--even if that is "no attribution"--and then locking down that
> property should work. We could make the property editable by an admin,
> though, for when and if it does need to change.
> >
> > Unfortunately, I'm not sure if it's possible to lock down a property on
> an otherwise-editable page.  Other MediaWiki gurus may be able to think of
> a clever workaround.
> >
> >
> > I also agree that a statement of our policy around licensing and
> attribution and the reasons that this encourages and protects content
> submission would make a fine blog post.
> >
> > +1
> >
> > Eliot
> >
> > >-----Original Message-----
> > >From: Chris Mills [mailto:cmills@opera.com]
> > >Sent: Saturday, January 19, 2013 1:16 AM
> > >To: Doug Schepers
> > >Cc: public-webplatform@w3.org
> > >Subject: Re: Important: Preserve Content Attribution
> > >
> > >
> > >Chris Mills
> > >Opera Software, dev.opera.com
> > >W3C Fellow, web education and webplatform.org Author of "Practical
> CSS3:
> > >Develop and Design" (http://goo.gl/AKf9M)
> > >
> > >On 19 Jan 2013, at 06:22, Doug Schepers <schepers@w3.org> wrote:
> > >
> > >> Hi, folks-
> > >>
> > >> As an addendum, it may be a good idea for us to investigate how we can
> > >make sure that attribution is preserved from removal by casual editors
> who
> > >aren't familiar with our policies.
> > >>
> > >> There may also be other kinds of information or content that we want
> to be
> > >immutable, including any legal advice or security warnings.
> > >>
> > >> I can think of 2 ways to manage this technically:
> > >>
> > >> 1) try to find a way to make certain blocks editable only by admins
> > >> (with a template somehow?);
> > >>
> > >> 2) try to find how to make any edits to a particular block send out a
> > >notification to some watcher.
> > >
> > >Nice overview Doug, this kind of information might be interesting as
> blog post
> > >... hint hint ;-)
> > >
> > >We could perhaps have a system whereby when an article is first added,
> the
> > >attribution information is a mandatory field for addition, addable by
> anyone,
> > >and then when they've finished  their addition (for now), it gives them
> a
> > >"finalise this article first draft, yes/no" meaning that the content is
> still
> > >editable, but certain information is locked down and only editable by
> admins,
> > >such as the attribution info...
> > >
> > >>
> > >> I don't know how feasible either of those approaches is... I welcome
> other
> > >thoughts.
> > >>
> > >> In the meantime, maybe we could add some instructions in the template,
> > >that show up in the form, that warn people from changing the attribution
> > >without careful consideration.
> > >>
> > >> Thoughts?
> > >>
> > >> Regards-
> > >> -Doug
> > >>
> > >> On 1/19/13 1:12 AM, Doug Schepers wrote:
> > >>> Hi, folks-
> > >>>
> > >>> There was a recently a slip-up in which some of the attribution on
> > >>> certain pages was removed; this has been corrected... no harm, no
> foul.
> > >>> But I thought it was a good idea to remind (or inform) everyone of
> > >>> the importance of attribution.
> > >>>
> > >>> Attribution is critical to this project, from a legal, practical, and
> > >>> motivational perspective.
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> On the legal side, our license is CC-BY, or Creative Commons
> > >>> Attribution. When we agree to the site license, we all agree to honor
> > >>> this. Failing to provide attribution, or removing past attribution,
> > >>> is a violation of the letter and spirit of this license. Note that
> > >>> there are two exception to this:
> > >>>
> > >>> 1) things that only state facts, and not interpretation, are not
> > >>> protected by copyright, and are thus outside the bounds of licensing
> .
> > >>> But this line can be gray... a compilation of facts is protected by
> > >>> copyright if the selection and arrangement of the material is
> > >>> original; it's safer to provide and preserve attribution
> > >>>
> > >>> 2) if all the original material from a particular source has been
> > >>> excised from the article, attribution for that source can optionally
> > >>> be removed; in practice, however, we are only using this to
> > >>> deliberately simplify the license the article is available under,
> > >>> e.g., if the original content was under CC-BY-SA (Attribution and
> > >>> Share Alike), we might remove all the old material so it can be
> reused
> > >under CC-BY.
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> On the practical side, attribution is used for fame and blame. Fame
> > >>> is praising the original contributor for their content, so people
> > >>> know who to credit and thank when they are reusing the content. Blame
> > >>> is the flip-side of the same coin... it helps users (and reusers) to
> > >>> evaluate any possibly bias on the part of the original contributor.
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> On the motivational side, we are lucky enough to have many primary
> > >>> bulk contet contributors, and we hope to have large numbers of
> > >>> community contributors over time. Part of what motivates those
> > >>> contributors is the aforementioned well-deserved fame... remove that
> > >>> attribution, and you undermine motivation, and the project suffers;
> > >>> even people who don't want notoriety per se still have a sense of
> > >>> fairness, and may be discouraged if their contributions are not
> afforded
> > >equal treatment.
> > >>> This even affects people who are potential contributors... they see
> > >>> how contributions and attributions are handled, and that may affect
> > >>> their decision on whether they will start contributing.
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> So, everyone, please remember not to remove existing attribution, and
> > >>> always give credit when adding content.
> > >>>
> > >>> Thanks!
> > >>>
> > >>> Regards-
> > >>> -Doug Schepers
> > >>> W3C Developer Relations Lead
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
Received on Friday, 25 January 2013 19:01:31 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 8 May 2013 19:57:38 UTC