Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

acawiki-general - Re: [acawiki-general] Proposal: AcaWiki to BY-SA

acawiki-general AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Acawiki-general mailing list

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Chitu Okoli <Chitu.Okoli AT concordia.ca>
  • To: "AcaWiki general (listserv)" <acawiki-general AT lists.ibiblio.org>
  • Subject: Re: [acawiki-general] Proposal: AcaWiki to BY-SA
  • Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2013 22:19:18 -0500

I hope SJ doesn't mind, but I added his variation to the wiki discussion: http://acawiki.org/AcaWiki:License_change_proposal. I also I added my comment to it: I think this variation would be too confusing and burdensome on reusers--they would have to dig through and interpret history pages to verify the correct license that applies to the current version.

I apologize for arguing so strongly, since I'm a newcomer, but this point has really always kept me from getting more involved with AcaWiki. (Please note that I tend to agree with SJ that CC-0 is even better than CC-BY for some use cases--open data comes to mind--but I personally don't think it is the best license for a resource like AcaWiki.) I could offer an alternate proposal that could possibly permit both BY and BY-SA versions of articles in a simpler format, but before I do that, I would really like to see some more compelling reasons given in support of CC-BY for AcaWiki.

I seem to remember a discussion or mention or implication some time back that CC-BY would facilitate widespread public dissemination of AcaWiki summaries. Other than reuse on CC-BY-SA sites like Wikimedia, are there other examples where AcaWiki summaries have been used in outlets that make scholarly research more visible and accessible to the general public? I really don't know, so I'm sincerely asking.

I remember observing many years ago the discussion that went behind the licensing of WikiNews, which I believe is the only Wikimedia project that is not licensed CC-BY-SA (I might be mistaken, though). It was originally public domain, and is now CC-BY. The main reason for the decision was to facilitate widespread dissemination and reuse of the articles. I really don't know for sure, but it is my impression that although the project maintains a very active group of contributors, its goal of having its articles widely disseminated has never been realized.

Are there other reasons for keeping AcaWiki CC-BY? I ask this with a genuine desire to learn, as I'm new here and I only know bits and pieces of the history.

~ Chitu

21 février 2013 17:31
I support a variation on this theme:

State that Acawiki will not add any licensing restrictions that included or transwikied material doesn't require. 

So: Any page that is solely the work of its acawiki author would be CC-BY.  Pages that incorporate CC-SA material would become CC-SA.

It is always safe to use material you find on Acawiki under CC-SA restrictions; but if you confirm that it was purely the result of edits on Acawiki, you can use it under CC-BY.

SJ

* CC-0 is actually my license of choice.  CC-BY is second best.  I don't want to conflate the two points by bringing up the BY-vs-0 discussion here.





--
Samuel Klein          @metasj           w:user:sj          +1 617 529 4266
20 février 2013 22:59
Thanks, Mike! On the page you created, I started a list of some sites I'm aware of with BY-SA academic summaries (though many of them might not quite fit AcaWiki's standards). Hopefully, others can add to the list.

I should probably disclose now that I have two websites (which I added to the list) that have a bunch of summaries which I really hope could find a permanent home on AcaWiki. As I said, though, I'm not sure if their formats quite fit.

~ Chitu

20 février 2013 22:24




Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page