[TOS] Textbook: author attribution

Karsten Wade kwade at redhat.com
Wed Mar 24 22:51:04 UTC 2010


On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 09:47:42AM -0700, Jeff Sheltren wrote:
> On Mar 24, 2010, at 7:28 AM, Greg DeKoenigsberg wrote:
> > We have, however, borrowed gigantic chunks.  Is attributing the authors of 
> > these chunks in the body of the text sufficient, or do they deserve 
> > co-authorship status?  Would they even want that?
> 
> I think attribution within the chapters is acceptable, and probably
> what the original authors would expect in most cases (at least, I
> would).

To expand on this thinking a bit ...

One of the concerns that the GFDL tried to address was an author being
attributed for a work they did not agree with philosophically by the
fact that their content was integrated.

I don't think we want to ever list someone as a co-author without
their personal permission to give them that title.  That leaves free
content works to be included as "contributions", and as part of the
colophon.  Red Hat and Fedora have used the colophon in that way for a
while.  (There is a <colophon> tag in XML just for that!)

- Karsten
-- 
name:  Karsten 'quaid' Wade, Sr. Community Gardener
team:                Red Hat Community Architecture 
uri:               http://TheOpenSourceWay.org/wiki
gpg:                                       AD0E0C41
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://teachingopensource.org/pipermail/tos/attachments/20100324/898347b7/attachment.asc>


More information about the tos mailing list