Talk:Text Directionality Draft - Revision history

Lou: /* Attribution */

2014-03-27T13:03:48Z

‎Attribution

Marcus: /* Attribution */

2013-11-29T15:52:57Z

‎Attribution

Marcus: /* Attribution */

2013-11-29T15:52:22Z

‎Attribution

Marcus: /* Attribution */

2013-11-29T15:51:45Z

‎Attribution

Marcus: /* Attribution */

2013-11-29T15:50:26Z

‎Attribution

Piotr Banski: /* Attribution */

2013-11-07T14:31:04Z

‎Attribution

Piotr Banski: /* Attribution */

2013-11-07T14:30:38Z

‎Attribution

Mholmes: /* Attribution */

2013-11-07T11:49:57Z

‎Attribution

Piotr Banski: /* Attribution */ new section

2013-11-06T18:17:37Z

‎Attribution: new section

Kshawkin: Created page with "Please see the associated Text Directionality Draft Questions document for some issues to think about before and after reading this draft, and feel free to respond there and ..."

2013-11-04T19:15:49Z

Created page with "Please see the associated Text Directionality Draft Questions document for some issues to think about before and after reading this draft, and feel free to respond there and ..."

New page

Please see the associated [[Text Directionality Draft Questions]] document for some issues to think about before and after reading this draft, and feel free to respond there and to add new questions.

← Older revision		Revision as of 13:03, 27 March 2014
Line 9:		Line 9:

	I second Martin's and Piotr's take on attribution. Contributing to the guidelines in progress is not something which generates (academic) credit. I therefore believe it is not necessary to include the origin of even the more interesting examples. Still we need to make sure all images, examples etc. are properly licensed.--[[User:Marcus\|Marcus]] 10:51, 29 November 2013 (EST)		I second Martin's and Piotr's take on attribution. Contributing to the guidelines in progress is not something which generates (academic) credit. I therefore believe it is not necessary to include the origin of even the more interesting examples. Still we need to make sure all images, examples etc. are properly licensed.--[[User:Marcus\|Marcus]] 10:51, 29 November 2013 (EST)
		+
		+	This is a question which is raised frequently. There are very many examples in the Guidelines which are not credited, and a very small number indeed which are, and those largely out of the editors' desire for a quiet life. When this material is incorporated there will be an attribution to the workgroup as a whole, with due thanks to all contributors. I don't think it is helpful to encumber the text with individual accreditations. [[User:Lou]]

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:52, 29 November 2013
Line 8:		Line 8:
	:Hi Martin, good point about the Guidelines themselves, where maintaining attributions across the evolving text would lead to a mess and maybe bile as well. There's no good solution that comes to my mind apart from the admittedly meagre one to credit while inside wiki and "clean" the prose of attributions when ready to transfer, but that idea suffers from many problems. Possibly, the only useful outcome of our conversation is the justification for the lack of attribution... (sigh). [[User:Piotr Banski\|Piotr]] 09:30, 7 November 2013 (EST)		:Hi Martin, good point about the Guidelines themselves, where maintaining attributions across the evolving text would lead to a mess and maybe bile as well. There's no good solution that comes to my mind apart from the admittedly meagre one to credit while inside wiki and "clean" the prose of attributions when ready to transfer, but that idea suffers from many problems. Possibly, the only useful outcome of our conversation is the justification for the lack of attribution... (sigh). [[User:Piotr Banski\|Piotr]] 09:30, 7 November 2013 (EST)

−	I second Martin's and Piotr's take on attribution. Contributing to the guidelines in progress is not something which generates (academic) credit. I therefore believe it is not necessary to include the origin of even the more interesting examples. Still we ~~probably~~ need to make sure all images etc. are properly licensed.--[[User:Marcus\|Marcus]] 10:51, 29 November 2013 (EST)	+	I second Martin's and Piotr's take on attribution. Contributing to the guidelines in progress is not something which generates (academic) credit. I therefore believe it is not necessary to include the origin of even the more interesting examples. Still we need to make sure all images, examples etc. are properly licensed.--[[User:Marcus\|Marcus]] 10:51, 29 November 2013 (EST)

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:52, 29 November 2013
Line 8:		Line 8:
	:Hi Martin, good point about the Guidelines themselves, where maintaining attributions across the evolving text would lead to a mess and maybe bile as well. There's no good solution that comes to my mind apart from the admittedly meagre one to credit while inside wiki and "clean" the prose of attributions when ready to transfer, but that idea suffers from many problems. Possibly, the only useful outcome of our conversation is the justification for the lack of attribution... (sigh). [[User:Piotr Banski\|Piotr]] 09:30, 7 November 2013 (EST)		:Hi Martin, good point about the Guidelines themselves, where maintaining attributions across the evolving text would lead to a mess and maybe bile as well. There's no good solution that comes to my mind apart from the admittedly meagre one to credit while inside wiki and "clean" the prose of attributions when ready to transfer, but that idea suffers from many problems. Possibly, the only useful outcome of our conversation is the justification for the lack of attribution... (sigh). [[User:Piotr Banski\|Piotr]] 09:30, 7 November 2013 (EST)

−	I second Martin's and Piotr's take on attribution. Contributing to the ~~guidelines~~ guidelines in progress is not something which generates academic credit. I therefore believe it is not necessary to include the origin of even the more interesting examples. Still we probably need to make sure all images etc. are properly licensed.--[[User:Marcus\|Marcus]] 10:51, 29 November 2013 (EST)	+	I second Martin's and Piotr's take on attribution. Contributing to the guidelines in progress is not something which generates (academic) credit. I therefore believe it is not necessary to include the origin of even the more interesting examples. Still we probably need to make sure all images etc. are properly licensed.--[[User:Marcus\|Marcus]] 10:51, 29 November 2013 (EST)

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:51, 29 November 2013
Line 8:		Line 8:
	:Hi Martin, good point about the Guidelines themselves, where maintaining attributions across the evolving text would lead to a mess and maybe bile as well. There's no good solution that comes to my mind apart from the admittedly meagre one to credit while inside wiki and "clean" the prose of attributions when ready to transfer, but that idea suffers from many problems. Possibly, the only useful outcome of our conversation is the justification for the lack of attribution... (sigh). [[User:Piotr Banski\|Piotr]] 09:30, 7 November 2013 (EST)		:Hi Martin, good point about the Guidelines themselves, where maintaining attributions across the evolving text would lead to a mess and maybe bile as well. There's no good solution that comes to my mind apart from the admittedly meagre one to credit while inside wiki and "clean" the prose of attributions when ready to transfer, but that idea suffers from many problems. Possibly, the only useful outcome of our conversation is the justification for the lack of attribution... (sigh). [[User:Piotr Banski\|Piotr]] 09:30, 7 November 2013 (EST)

−	I second Martin's and Piotr's take on attribution. Contributing to the guidelines guidelines in progress is not something which generates academic credit. I therefore believe it is not necessary to include the origin of even the more interesting examples. Still we probably need to make sure all images etc. are properly licensed.	+	I second Martin's and Piotr's take on attribution. Contributing to the guidelines guidelines in progress is not something which generates academic credit. I therefore believe it is not necessary to include the origin of even the more interesting examples. Still we probably need to make sure all images etc. are properly licensed.--[[User:Marcus\|Marcus]] 10:51, 29 November 2013 (EST)

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:50, 29 November 2013
Line 7:		Line 7:
	Thanks Piotr -- I agree completely, and I've added the attribution. I'm not sure whether an attribution like this should make it into the final Guidelines prose, though -- I don't remember any examples of that in the existing prose, and even Guidelines sections are (correctly) not attributed to individual authors. Richard Ishida from the W3C has also provided some helpful guidance, as have the other members of the workgroup of course.		Thanks Piotr -- I agree completely, and I've added the attribution. I'm not sure whether an attribution like this should make it into the final Guidelines prose, though -- I don't remember any examples of that in the existing prose, and even Guidelines sections are (correctly) not attributed to individual authors. Richard Ishida from the W3C has also provided some helpful guidance, as have the other members of the workgroup of course.
	:Hi Martin, good point about the Guidelines themselves, where maintaining attributions across the evolving text would lead to a mess and maybe bile as well. There's no good solution that comes to my mind apart from the admittedly meagre one to credit while inside wiki and "clean" the prose of attributions when ready to transfer, but that idea suffers from many problems. Possibly, the only useful outcome of our conversation is the justification for the lack of attribution... (sigh). [[User:Piotr Banski\|Piotr]] 09:30, 7 November 2013 (EST)		:Hi Martin, good point about the Guidelines themselves, where maintaining attributions across the evolving text would lead to a mess and maybe bile as well. There's no good solution that comes to my mind apart from the admittedly meagre one to credit while inside wiki and "clean" the prose of attributions when ready to transfer, but that idea suffers from many problems. Possibly, the only useful outcome of our conversation is the justification for the lack of attribution... (sigh). [[User:Piotr Banski\|Piotr]] 09:30, 7 November 2013 (EST)
		+
		+	I second Martin's and Piotr's take on attribution. Contributing to the guidelines guidelines in progress is not something which generates academic credit. I therefore believe it is not necessary to include the origin of even the more interesting examples. Still we probably need to make sure all images etc. are properly licensed.

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:31, 7 November 2013
Line 6:		Line 6:

	Thanks Piotr -- I agree completely, and I've added the attribution. I'm not sure whether an attribution like this should make it into the final Guidelines prose, though -- I don't remember any examples of that in the existing prose, and even Guidelines sections are (correctly) not attributed to individual authors. Richard Ishida from the W3C has also provided some helpful guidance, as have the other members of the workgroup of course.		Thanks Piotr -- I agree completely, and I've added the attribution. I'm not sure whether an attribution like this should make it into the final Guidelines prose, though -- I don't remember any examples of that in the existing prose, and even Guidelines sections are (correctly) not attributed to individual authors. Richard Ishida from the W3C has also provided some helpful guidance, as have the other members of the workgroup of course.
−	:Hi Martin, good point about the Guidelines themselves, where maintaining attributions across the evolving text would lead to a mess and maybe bile as well. There's no good solution that comes to my mind apart from the admittedly meagre one to credit while inside wiki and "clean" the prose of attributions when ready to transfer, but that idea suffers from many problems. Possibly, the only useful outcome of our conversation is the ~~explanation~~ for the lack of attribution... (sigh). [[User:Piotr Banski\|Piotr]] 09:30, 7 November 2013 (EST)	+	:Hi Martin, good point about the Guidelines themselves, where maintaining attributions across the evolving text would lead to a mess and maybe bile as well. There's no good solution that comes to my mind apart from the admittedly meagre one to credit while inside wiki and "clean" the prose of attributions when ready to transfer, but that idea suffers from many problems. Possibly, the only useful outcome of our conversation is the justification for the lack of attribution... (sigh). [[User:Piotr Banski\|Piotr]] 09:30, 7 November 2013 (EST)

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:30, 7 November 2013
Line 6:		Line 6:

	Thanks Piotr -- I agree completely, and I've added the attribution. I'm not sure whether an attribution like this should make it into the final Guidelines prose, though -- I don't remember any examples of that in the existing prose, and even Guidelines sections are (correctly) not attributed to individual authors. Richard Ishida from the W3C has also provided some helpful guidance, as have the other members of the workgroup of course.		Thanks Piotr -- I agree completely, and I've added the attribution. I'm not sure whether an attribution like this should make it into the final Guidelines prose, though -- I don't remember any examples of that in the existing prose, and even Guidelines sections are (correctly) not attributed to individual authors. Richard Ishida from the W3C has also provided some helpful guidance, as have the other members of the workgroup of course.
		+	:Hi Martin, good point about the Guidelines themselves, where maintaining attributions across the evolving text would lead to a mess and maybe bile as well. There's no good solution that comes to my mind apart from the admittedly meagre one to credit while inside wiki and "clean" the prose of attributions when ready to transfer, but that idea suffers from many problems. Possibly, the only useful outcome of our conversation is the explanation for the lack of attribution... (sigh). [[User:Piotr Banski\|Piotr]] 09:30, 7 November 2013 (EST)

← Older revision		Revision as of 11:49, 7 November 2013
Line 4:		Line 4:

	Sometimes one well-chosen example organizes an entire section, or even chapter, and is a guarantee of success. In cases where such an example comes from a helpful soul that is not automatically credited in the wiki article history, it's good to provide the attribution immediately, for fear that the contribution gets forgotten and some awkwardness may ensue, in the end. I'm sure the final version would mention Efraim Feinstein as the source of the Hebrew example, but we know how sometimes drafts get stalled and all. I suggest to go ahead and attribute at once, as a general principle. Great read, by the way, and very enlightening -- thanks! [[User:Piotr Banski\|Piotr]] 13:17, 6 November 2013 (EST)		Sometimes one well-chosen example organizes an entire section, or even chapter, and is a guarantee of success. In cases where such an example comes from a helpful soul that is not automatically credited in the wiki article history, it's good to provide the attribution immediately, for fear that the contribution gets forgotten and some awkwardness may ensue, in the end. I'm sure the final version would mention Efraim Feinstein as the source of the Hebrew example, but we know how sometimes drafts get stalled and all. I suggest to go ahead and attribute at once, as a general principle. Great read, by the way, and very enlightening -- thanks! [[User:Piotr Banski\|Piotr]] 13:17, 6 November 2013 (EST)
		+
		+	Thanks Piotr -- I agree completely, and I've added the attribution. I'm not sure whether an attribution like this should make it into the final Guidelines prose, though -- I don't remember any examples of that in the existing prose, and even Guidelines sections are (correctly) not attributed to individual authors. Richard Ishida from the W3C has also provided some helpful guidance, as have the other members of the workgroup of course.

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:17, 6 November 2013
Line 1:		Line 1:
	Please see the associated [[Text Directionality Draft Questions]] document for some issues to think about before and after reading this draft, and feel free to respond there and to add new questions.		Please see the associated [[Text Directionality Draft Questions]] document for some issues to think about before and after reading this draft, and feel free to respond there and to add new questions.
		+
		+	== Attribution ==
		+
		+	Sometimes one well-chosen example organizes an entire section, or even chapter, and is a guarantee of success. In cases where such an example comes from a helpful soul that is not automatically credited in the wiki article history, it's good to provide the attribution immediately, for fear that the contribution gets forgotten and some awkwardness may ensue, in the end. I'm sure the final version would mention Efraim Feinstein as the source of the Hebrew example, but we know how sometimes drafts get stalled and all. I suggest to go ahead and attribute at once, as a general principle. Great read, by the way, and very enlightening -- thanks! [[User:Piotr Banski\|Piotr]] 13:17, 6 November 2013 (EST)