Caution needed when giving rights by template (& bad technical advice given on wiki)

Tantek has just reverted
<http://microfo
rmats.org/wiki?title=Category%3Apublic_domain_license&di
ff=0&oldid=18734>
a change I made to the 'wiki'; to the suggested method of
including the
"Public Domain release" template. I had changed
the recommended method of
suing the template from:

	{}
to:

	{{subst:public-domain-release}}

The "subst" parameter causes the text, current at
the time of use, of the
template to be written permanently into the wiki-code source
of the page
on which it appears, as opposed to calling it from the
template every
time. This means that subsequent changes to the template do
NOT appear on
the individual page concerned.

I made this edit in the light of Manu's well- intentioned,
but misguided,
request that changes be made to the template:

<http://microformats.org/discu
ss/mail/microformats-discuss/2007-July/010238.html>

I would STRONGLY advise anyone thinking of placing their
contributions
into the public domain to "subst" the template (or
use their own wording),
rather than calling template which may be changed in future,
to a form of
wording with which they do not agree; and with no change
being noted in
the "history" of their user page. To use the
template without "subst" is
like signing a contract with a blank section for the other
party to
complete at a later date.

Tantek's justification for the edit was that he was
reverting to the form
of wording used by Wikipedia. As has become clear, Wikipedia
and this
'wiki' are run on very different lines, with the former
having far more
openness and accountability. Wikipedia uses
"subst"  on other templates;
and anyone who chooses may "subst" thir PD
template.


In the same edit, Tantek restored instructions, such as
"use CTRL S to
save", which I'd removed, which are OS and browser
specific, on the basis
that they help some people. All the usability guidance I've
ever read on
the subject, cautions against giving such advice, which is
akin to saying
"to get coffee, turn left, then second right, then the
kitchen is first
left". This will help everyone in the office where I
work, but probably
won't apply to many other people reading this.

-- 
Andy Mabbett


_______________________________________________
microformats-discuss mailing list
microformats-discussmicroformats.org
http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microforma
ts-discuss

On 7/25/07 2:29 AM, "Andy Mabbett" <andypigsonthewing.org.uk> wrote:

> I made this edit in the light of Manu's well-
intentioned, but misguided,
> request that changes be made to the template:
> 
> <http://microformats.org/discuss/mai
l/microformats-discuss/2007-July/010238.ht
> ml>

To be clear, such changes are NOT going to be made to the
template.

Here's why:

The text of the template was taken from Wikipedia,
deliberately, as-is in
order to be clearly consistent with the Public Domain
Declaration there.
That's the safest thing to do for a number of reasons
(consistency, not
introducing unintended changes etc.).

We are essentially saying we believe that Wikipedia has done
the right thing
with respect to their public domain declaration and are
joining that in that
respect.

Anybody wanting to change that should take it up upstream as
it were, take
the debate to the Wikipedia's public domain declaration.  We
don't want the
debate about public domain wording here.  Any further issue
with that can be
taken up with Rohit per the instructions on his user page.


> I would STRONGLY advise anyone thinking of placing
their contributions
> into the public domain to "subst" the
template (or use their own wording),

This is NOT the method of inclusion of the template used by
Wikipedia, and
thus it is NOT recommended on that basis.

This is also a REALLY BAD IDEA due to the fact that if any
subtle changes of
wording of public domain declaration occur across people's
user pages, then
it becomes much harder to determine if they are consistent
or not to place
pages which people have jointly edited into the public
domain.

It is best for the community for everyone to use *one*
public domain
declaration, period.  And if that declaration needs to be
corrected due to a
typo etc., it is better that *everyone* get those fixes and
stay consistent.

Frankly Andy, due to your use of the {} method, you
have now added
additional time cost to determining if any page *you* edit
in particular is
consistently in the public domain or not with respect to all
other public
domain contributors.

I'd like you to please reconsider and use the direct
template inclusion form
on your user page for the good of community.


> rather than calling template which may be changed in
future, to a form of
> wording with which they do not agree;

See the above.  Such changes, of *any form* from what the
text said in
Wikipedia is undesirable for any reason, whether everyone
agrees or not.

In addition, you can bet that if anyone *does* change it,
there will be
sufficient people watching to raise red flags and point that
out.

The *only* type of wording changes I can see occurring are
if Wikipedia
changes *their* public domain declaration wording, it is
likely that we may
and will follow suit, to stay in sync and consistent as it
were.


> Tantek's justification for the edit was that he was
reverting to the form
> of wording used by Wikipedia. As has become clear,
Wikipedia and this
> 'wiki' are run on very different lines, with the former
having far more
> openness and accountability. Wikipedia uses
"subst"  on other templates;
> and anyone who chooses may "subst" thir PD
template.

Wikipedia uses the direct template inclusion on the Public
Domain
Declaration {{ }} and thus we will recommend that as well. 
We're not using
other templates from Wikipedia at this point so what they do
on other
templates is irrelevant.

Tantek

_______________________________________________
microformats-discuss mailing list
microformats-discussmicroformats.org
http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microforma
ts-discuss

On 7/25/07 2:29 AM, "Andy Mabbett" <andypigsonthewing.org.uk> wrote:

> In the same edit, Tantek restored instructions, such as
"use CTRL S to
> save", which I'd removed, which are OS and browser
specific, on the basis
> that they help some people.

Actually, ctrl-s/alt-s help *the vast majority of people*
who use Windows or
Mac for that matter, as the modern browsers on those systems
all support the
respective ACCESSKEYs, as do most browsers on linux systems
as well.  90+%
easily in terms of total marketshare etc.

If you'd like to suggest improvements for how to word these
efficiency
enhancing shortcut tips, it would be great to hear them, but
summarily
removing them when clearly they were intended to help was a
bit rude.


> All the usability guidance I've ever read on
> the subject, cautions against giving such advice, which
is akin to saying
> "to get coffee, turn left, then second right, then
the kitchen is first
> left". This will help everyone in the office where
I work, but probably
> won't apply to many other people reading this.

The analogy is false as the coffee directions apply to
perhaps <1% of the
people on this list, but the Mediawiki accesskey shortcuts
apply to >99% of
the people on this list.

Tantek

_______________________________________________
microformats-discuss mailing list
microformats-discussmicroformats.org
http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microforma
ts-discuss

In message <C2CCF551.927A9%tantekcs.stanford.edu>, Tantek
Çelik 
<tantekcs.stanford.edu> writes

>On 7/25/07 2:29 AM, "Andy Mabbett"
<andypigsonthewing.org.uk> wrote:
>
>> In the same edit, Tantek restored instructions,
such as "use CTRL S to
>> save", which I'd removed, which are OS and
browser specific, on the basis
>> that they help some people.
>
>Actually, ctrl-s/alt-s help *the vast majority of
people* who use 
>Windows or Mac for that matter, as the modern browsers
on those systems 
>all support the respective ACCESSKEYs, as do most
browsers on linux 
>systems as well.  90+% easily in terms of total
marketshare etc.

<http://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=477>

>If you'd like to suggest improvements for how to word
these efficiency 
>enhancing shortcut tips, it would be great to hear them,
but summarily 
>removing them when clearly they were intended to help
was a bit rude.

You're in no position to lecture me or anyone else on
manners.

I do sometimes wonder why you bothered to install wiki
software.

And I don't have time to list all the edits, clearly
intended to help, 
which you have summarily reverted.

>> All the usability guidance I've ever read on
>> the subject, cautions against giving such advice,
which is akin to saying
>> "to get coffee, turn left, then second right,
then the kitchen is first
>> left". This will help everyone in the office
where I work, but probably
>> won't apply to many other people reading this.
>
>The analogy is false as the coffee directions apply to
perhaps <1% of 
>the people on this list, but the Mediawiki accesskey
shortcuts apply to 
>>99% of the people on this list.

I think you've just invented that statistic. Care to prove
me wrong?

-- 
Andy Mabbett

_______________________________________________
microformats-discuss mailing list
microformats-discussmicroformats.org
http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microforma
ts-discuss

From: "Andy Mabbett" <andypigsonthewing.org.uk>
> Tantek Çelik <tantekcs.stanford.edu> writes
>>The analogy is false as the coffee directions apply
to perhaps <1% of the 
>>people on this list, but the Mediawiki accesskey
shortcuts apply to
>>>99% of the people on this list.
>
> I think you've just invented that statistic. Care to
prove me wrong?

In the interest of public spirit, I use ctrl-s to save.

Perhaps this would be resolved more quickly if we get a
hands-up of people, 
on this list, who aren't able to use ctrl-s to save.

-- 
Paul Wilkins 

_______________________________________________
microformats-discuss mailing list
microformats-discussmicroformats.org
http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microforma
ts-discuss

In message <C2CCF51F.927A7%tantekcs.stanford.edu>, Tantek
Çelik 
<tantekcs.stanford.edu> writes

>On 7/25/07 2:29 AM, "Andy Mabbett"
<andypigsonthewing.org.uk> wrote:
>
>> I made this edit in the light of Manu's well-
intentioned, but misguided,
>> request that changes be made to the template:
>>
>> 
>><http://microformats.org/discuss/mail/micro
formats-discuss/2007-July/01
>>0238.ht
>> ml>
>
>To be clear, such changes are NOT going to be made to
the template.

I'm not prepared to take your word for that; not least
because you might 
not be here at some point in the intermediate future.

>Here's why:
>
>The text of the template was taken from Wikipedia,
deliberately, as-is in
>order to be clearly consistent with the Public Domain
Declaration there.
>That's the safest thing to do for a number of reasons
(consistency, not
>introducing unintended changes etc.).

Copying a template from Wikipedia is no guarantee that it
won't change. 
The wording on the Wikipedia template could be - and has
been - changed 
at any point. Any changes which are made, will be subject to
community 
consensus and debate - unlike changes made to the
microformats wiki. 
There are no "editors", with additional rights
over other users, on 
Wikipedia.

Not only that, but if you read Wikipedia's copyright
statements, I think 
you'll find that you have no right to put a page containing
a template, 
lifted wholesale from Wikipedia, into the public domain;
you'd be 
breaching the copyright belong to the original author(s) if
you didn't 
attach a GDFL licence.

>We are essentially saying we believe that Wikipedia has
done the right thing
>with respect to their public domain declaration and are
joining that in that
>respect.

Legally, that's meaningless.

>Anybody wanting to change that should take it up
upstream as it were, take
>the debate to the Wikipedia's public domain
declaration.

That would have no bearing on rights over material on this
'wiki'.

> We don't want the
>debate about public domain wording here.  Any further
issue with that can be
>taken up with Rohit per the instructions on his user
page.

That experiment with open governance was short-lived; it's
just five 
days since Rohit opened discussion on the matter, on this
list.

>> I would STRONGLY advise anyone thinking of placing
their contributions
>> into the public domain to "subst" the
template (or use their own wording),
>
>This is NOT the method of inclusion of the template used
by Wikipedia, and
>thus it is NOT recommended on that basis.

As I have already pointed out, anyone who chooses to do so
may "subst" 
the template onto their user page, rather than transcluding
it.

>This is also a REALLY BAD IDEA due to the fact that if
any subtle changes of
>wording of public domain declaration occur across
people's user pages, then
>it becomes much harder to determine if they are
consistent or not to place
>pages which people have jointly edited into the public
domain.

So changes might be made to the template, after all?

>It is best for the community for everyone to use *one*
public domain
>declaration, period.

That assertion is completely without foundation or
justification.

>  And if that declaration needs to be corrected due to
a
>typo etc., it is better that *everyone* get those fixes
and stay consistent.

Typos, or changes to them, can have significant consequences
in legal 
documents.

>Frankly Andy, due to your use of the {} method,
you have now added
>additional time cost to determining if any page *you*
edit in particular is
>consistently in the public domain or not with respect to
all other public
>domain contributors.

Frankly, Tantek, that's bullshit.

>I'd like you to please reconsider and use the direct
template inclusion form
>on your user page for the good of community.

No, I'm not writing you or anyone else a blank cheque.

>> rather than calling template which may be changed
in future, to a form of
>> wording with which they do not agree;
>
>See the above.  Such changes, of *any form* from what
the text said in
>Wikipedia is undesirable for any reason, whether
everyone agrees or not.

If *any form* of change is undesirable, then hard-coding the
text onto 
individual user pages should present no problem.

>In addition, you can bet that if anyone *does* change
it, there will be
>sufficient people watching to raise red flags and point
that out.

"Bet" being the operative word - I don't gamble
with my legal rights.

>The *only* type of wording changes I can see occurring
are if Wikipedia
>changes *their* public domain declaration wording, it is
likely that we may
>and will follow suit, to stay in sync and consistent as
it were.

"if ... likely" doesn't carry much legal weight.

>> Tantek's justification for the edit was that he was
reverting to the form
>> of wording used by Wikipedia. As has become clear,
Wikipedia and this
>> 'wiki' are run on very different lines, with the
former having far more
>> openness and accountability. Wikipedia uses
"subst"  on other templates;
>> and anyone who chooses may "subst" thir
PD template.
>
>Wikipedia uses the direct template inclusion on the
Public Domain
>Declaration {{ }} and thus we will recommend that as
well.  We're not using
>other templates from Wikipedia at this point so what
they do on other
>templates is irrelevant.

What they do with *this* template is to allow *either*
transclusion or 
SUBSTitiution. They also have other, alternative PD
templates.


You may wish to again dismiss my concerns, out of hand, as
mere 
argumentativeness, but if they're not addressed now, they
will be back 
to bite the community later.

-- 
Andy Mabbett

_______________________________________________
microformats-discuss mailing list
microformats-discussmicroformats.org
http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microforma
ts-discuss

In message <005101c7cf0e$6f462bf0$bc08a8c0nzto22>, Paul Wilkins 
<paul_wilkinsxtra.co.nz> writes

>From: "Andy Mabbett" <andypigsonthewing.org.uk>
>> Tantek Çelik <tantekcs.stanford.edu> writes
>>>The analogy is false as the coffee directions
apply to perhaps <1% of 
>>>the people on this list, but the Mediawiki
accesskey shortcuts apply 
>>>
>>>>99% of the people on this list.
>>
>> I think you've just invented that statistic. Care
to prove me wrong?
>
>In the interest of public spirit, I use ctrl-s to save.
>
>Perhaps this would be resolved more quickly if we get a
hands-up of 
>people, on this list, who aren't able to use ctrl-s to
save.

CTRL-S on my machine. *when editing a wiki page*, causes my
browser to 
open a dialogue to save a local copy of the editing form.

-- 
Andy Mabbett

_______________________________________________
microformats-discuss mailing list
microformats-discussmicroformats.org
http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microforma
ts-discuss

On Jul 25, 2007, at 4:52 PM, Paul Wilkins wrote:

>> I think you've just invented that statistic. Care
to prove me wrong?
>
> In the interest of public spirit, I use ctrl-s to
save.

As do I, since I discovered on the page in question that it
was an  
option.  But it seems we're just debating for the sake of
debate  
here.  Mediawiki uses accesskey.  And microformats.org uses 

Mediawiki.  Deleting references to that fact does not make
it any  
less true.  Nor do any statistics, bug reports, nor anything
else  
short of rewriting or replacing Mediawiki.  I don't believe
anyone  
here intends to do that, so I don't see any point of
discussing this  
beyond personal axe grinding, which I'd ask be taken
off-list.

Peace,
Scott
_______________________________________________
microformats-discuss mailing list
microformats-discussmicroformats.org
http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microforma
ts-discuss

From: "Andy Mabbett" <andypigsonthewing.org.uk>
> CTRL-S on my machine. *when editing a wiki page*,
causes my browser to 
> open a dialogue to save a local copy of the editing
form.

When editing a wiki page you're right. The Accesskey is ctrl
on IE5/Mac and 
it's variations of the alt key on most other browsers. The
exceptions to 
this tend to be Firefox 2 with alt-shift, Opera with
shift-esc, and ancient 
browsers that don't support Accesskeys.

Getting back to where this all started, the instruction in
question is "use 
CTRL S to save"
That's only valid if the browser is something like IE5/Mac

It could be a lot better if it said
"Accesskeys differ according to your browser."
which links off to a page 
that explains about Accesskeys, followed by "use
ACCESSKEY S to save"

-- 
Paul Wilkins 

_______________________________________________
microformats-discuss mailing list
microformats-discussmicroformats.org
http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microforma
ts-discuss

In message <007401c7cf15$8872db80$bc08a8c0nzto22>, Paul Wilkins 
<paul_wilkinsxtra.co.nz> writes

>From: "Andy Mabbett" <andypigsonthewing.org.uk>
>> CTRL-S on my machine. *when editing a wiki page*,
causes my browser 
>>to  open a dialogue to save a local copy of the
editing form.
>
>When editing a wiki page you're right. The Accesskey is
ctrl on IE5/Mac 
>and it's variations of the alt key on most other
browsers. The 
>exceptions to this tend to be Firefox 2 with alt-shift,
Opera with 
>shift-esc, and ancient browsers that don't support
Accesskeys.
>
>Getting back to where this all started, the instruction
in question is 
>"use CTRL S to save"
>That's only valid if the browser is something like
IE5/Mac
>
>It could be a lot better if it said
>"Accesskeys differ according to your browser."
which links off to a 
>page that explains about Accesskeys, followed by
"use ACCESSKEY S to 
>save"

It would be better still to say nothing. We don't say
"move your mouse 
pointer here and press the button to go to the page
about..."

-- 
Andy Mabbett
_______________________________________________
microformats-discuss mailing list
microformats-discussmicroformats.org
http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microforma
ts-discuss