On Sun, Jul 08, 2007 at 02:14:11PM +0200, Nicolas François wrote: > On Sat, Jul 07, 2007 at 08:54:08PM -0500, Ming Hua wrote: > > On Sat, Jul 07, 2007 at 04:19:15PM +0200, Nicolas François wrote: > > > > I'm thinking about something like: > > > > > > "Last-Translator: FULL NAME <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>\n" > > > "Language-Team: LANGUAGE <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>\n" > > > "Translator[0]: FULL NAME <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, YEAR\n" > > > "Translator[1]: FULL NAME <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, YEAR, YEAR\n" > > > "Translator[2]: FULL NAME <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, YEAR, YEAR-YEAR\n" > > > > What about the translations whose copyright is transfered to FSF (which > > is acutally quite common, either due to explicit request by FSF, such as > > all the TP translations, or due to careless translators just using the > > default header generated by gettext) or (in Debian's case) SPI? > > > > What about some translators that don't want to hold copyright for > > his/her translation, but the team still want to credit his/her work by > > listing him/her as a translator? > > We could differentiate > Copyright (C) FULL NAME <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, YEAR > and > FULL NAME <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, YEAR
What do you think of using "Copyright-Holder" field? IMHO, if we decide to start using fields to record the copyright/license field, we'd better try putting all necessary information in the fields, instead of having a "need to check both file header and information fields" situation. That would unavoidably lead to controversial information. I also like the idea of "License" field. Ming 2007.07.08 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
