Thanks Sally for bringing this up on our mailinglist.
On Mon, Jul 24, 2006 at 08:15:50PM +0200, Axel Wernicke wrote:
> > [...] cutted out
> >
> > - We don't want to violate anyone's copyright by using their
> > material without a reference.
> Well, good point. Right now I usually copied the first paragraph of
> the wikipedia article and added a link. But wikipedia is free. There
> is no way to violate wikipedias copyright, since all the content is
> free ?!
I think so as well. From the copyright point of view we should be in a
green zone ;)
> > - Is it really useful for the Gimp document readers to have to
> > refer to further information somewhere else? But if not, how
> > extensively should the Gimp docs go into specific topics?
> Thats IMHO a very important point. I think it is specially in the
> glossary important to give a SHORT definition of the term or topic,
> but ALSO give a reference for people who like to know exactly whats
> going on in the CMYK color space model.
Yeah - I think that this point needs to be discussed. I mean, is it
really important to copy content from wikipedia _or_ write our own
description? The problem which strucks me for both things are:
1. Wikipedia can change and we doubled the maintainance of text
(they can be wrong as well as we are)
2. Wikipedia has probably more writeres and reviewers than we have.
The quality should be much more extensive and better than our
glossary.
So, in which degree makes it sense for us to use or write our own
glossary? I'd probably go with Axels SHORT definition on our own or
cited from wikipedia. We already have an entry in our bibliography
refering to wikipedia. Maybe a small note should state that the article
or a paragraph is from wikipedia?
> > One possibility would be to cite Wikipedia once at the top of the
> > Glossary for more information?
> Uh, could you explain this a bit more detailed - I don't get your idea.
>
> I think we indeed should double check the possibility of copyright
> issues, but AFAIK we are not doing anything evil.
Linking to wikipedia for each topic or glossentry doesn't make sense at
all IMHO. If the reader prints out our manual, he'd find a lot of links
which wouldn't help.
Greetings,
--
Roman Joost
www: http://www.romanofski.de
email: romanofski@xxxxxxxx
Attachment:
pgphhfSxPrcRI.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Gimp-docs mailing list Gimp-docs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-docs
