Re: On Synergy Effects with MDN


thanks for the answer. Yes, I understand the line of thought.

What I partly had in mind, was content exchange in some areas. MDN's
CC-by-sa license would be suitable for this. I haven't found a license
statement on the W3C wiki on quick browsing, so the following stands
under the assumption, that the wiki adopted the W3C doc license.

So if, for example, MDN's SVG reference would be completely browser
agnostic, and licensing wouldn't be an issue, then developing merge
strategies between both wikis' content could be rewarding. (This also
includes correct attribution, which might actually be the largest issue.
The CC or Wikimedia people might have cleverer ideas on the topic than I
can come up with.)


Am 20.06.2011 04:35, schrieb Karl Dubost:
> Hi Manuel,
> The MDN is a wonderful documentation indeed with a lot of people who have contributed to it. I have encouraged a few times, people updating MDN to put efforts into documenting the W3C wiki (as a vendor *neutral* place). 
> Eric and Janet have went out of their way to be more inclusive of other browsers information. Though it is a Mozilla project with its branding everywhere. I wish the Mozilla Foundation had made the opposite effort to donate the full corpus of documentation to the W3C wiki and redirect the URI. 
> There is a benefit to have something which is not under the flag of one of the browser vendors. 
> PS: I pushed this solution when I was part of W3C staff, and I'm still pushing it now that I'm working for Opera Software. The same way, it would be awkward for me if it was an ODN (Opera Documentation Network).
> PS2: Not talking for Opera or W3C.

Received on Tuesday, 21 June 2011 20:12:25 UTC