3 ms·
Transfer of ownership nor CC licensing explains the lack of attribution, a sign of disrespect and disregard.
by donpark 3y ago
Transfer of ownership nor CC licensing explains the lack of attribution, a sign of disrespect and disregard.
- rcade 3y agoThe credit line on the specification has been unchanged since Aug. 12, 2006: "This document is authored by the RSS Advisory Board and is offered under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution/Share Alike license, based on an original document published by the Berkman Center for Internet & Society." We've never been asked to change that, by Dave Winer or anyone else.
- donpark 3y agoHe is now asking. Are you saying it's too late?
- rcade 3y agoBecause of his new request for an attribution change, the credit line now reads, "This document is authored by the RSS Advisory Board and is offered under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution/Share Alike license, based on an original document published by the Berkman Klein Center for Internet & Society authored by Dave Winer, founder of UserLand Software." https://www.rssboard.org/rss-specification https://www.rssboard.org/rss-specification This also includes a change to reflect that the Berkman Center for Internet & Society became the Berkman Klein Center for Internet & Society in 2016.
- donpark 3y agoExcellent.
- shelleyp 3y agoThere should never be something about 'respect' when it comes to a specification. When I publish anything on the web, do I have to give credit to Tim Berners-Lee each time? A specification isn't a badge of honor, it's a useful tool, one among many. Other than clarification of who is currently authority for, and making changes to, a specification, there should be no names on any spec or standard. .
- donpark 3y agoRespect is also a useful tool. It reduces conflicts just as diplomacy reduces violence. Yes, respect can be set aside but, when you do, expect controversy. Why would anyone want to invite unnecessary controversy when writing a spec?