On Sat, Jul 12, 2014 at 12:22 AM, Gergo Tisza <gti...@wikimedia.org> wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 11, 2014 at 3:58 AM, Todd Allen <toddmal...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > That doesn't, however, help the concern that millions of users are > pulling > > up the images without immediately seeing the license requirements and > > author information. > > > To the contrary, Media Viewer displays the license, author and source as an > always visible part of the image. On a typical file page, you have to > scroll down to find any of this information; most users won't do that, if > what they are looking for is the image, and that is available without > scrolling. (It is well known in web usability > <http://www.nngroup.com/articles/scrolling-and-attention/> that relatively > little attention is given to things above the fold; one of the main > benefits of Media Viewer is that it brings the most important things above > it.) Agree. The best practices for "marking a work" is to "*make sure that the license information is clearly visible underneath (or otherwise next to) the image." [1] [2]* *1. **http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Marking_your_work_with_a_CC_license <http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Marking_your_work_with_a_CC_license>* *2. http://www.newmediarights.org/guide/how_to/creative_commons/best_practices_creative_commons_attributions <http://www.newmediarights.org/guide/how_to/creative_commons/best_practices_creative_commons_attributions>* *Unfortunately our "file description page" give more importance for subject description and bury the attribution parameters in a negligible location. As a result most reuses end up with an attribution, "Credit:Wiki[m/p]edia". :(* *Jee* _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
