Difference between revisions of "ISFDB talk:Image linking permissions"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
DESiegel60 (talk | contribs) (resp to Circeus's edits) |
("Bibliography" and other rare beasts) |
||
| Line 11: | Line 11: | ||
:*"bibliographic database" I have not changed this, but there might be people who are not clear on what a bibliographic database consists of, while "displays information about the titles, authors, and publications" is hard to misunderstand. Not a major issue, however. | :*"bibliographic database" I have not changed this, but there might be people who are not clear on what a bibliographic database consists of, while "displays information about the titles, authors, and publications" is hard to misunderstand. Not a major issue, however. | ||
:Thanks for your revisions. -[[User:DESiegel60|DES]] <sup>[[User talk:DESiegel60|Talk]]</sup> 15:17, 12 May 2008 (UTC) | :Thanks for your revisions. -[[User:DESiegel60|DES]] <sup>[[User talk:DESiegel60|Talk]]</sup> 15:17, 12 May 2008 (UTC) | ||
| + | |||
| + | ::Based on personal observations, a significant number of people (at least in the US) are not quite sure what the term "bibliography" means and confuse it with "biography" or something else. The percentage is probably lower in countries where the word "Bibliothèque" (or its derivatives) is common. Granted, we will be contacting people who own and maintain bibliographic sites, so chances are that they will be familiar with the term, but on the other hand it's entirely possible that our e-mail will be originally handled by a clerk or a techie with no bibliographic background. You can never be too careful! :) [[User:Ahasuerus|Ahasuerus]] 17:14, 12 May 2008 (UTC) | ||
Revision as of 13:14, 12 May 2008
Discuss revisions in the draft letter, or in our linking policy, here. This would also be a good place to document sites that have been asked for linking permission. -DES Talk 21:45, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
I made two changes for clarity:
- "displays information about the titles, authors, and publications" to "is a bibliographic database"
- Why overstate the obvious, after all?
- Extended this sentence with the last part: "When the publication page is displayed, using the image found at that URL as an image source for the page display, it can be clicked to access the image on the original site directly."
- Without it, it was not grammatical, and mentioning that we also have explicit backlinks seems proper.
Circeus 20:34, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
- You are correct that the sentance about the display of the publication page was a fragment. However, your change seems to imply that that the host server is not accessed unless the user clicks, whcih is not correct. I have editied it further, so that it now reads: "When the publication page is displayed, the the page logic uses the image found at that URL as an image source for the page display, which results in a call to the host server. Also, the displayed image can be clicked to access the image on the original site directly." What do you think of thsi version?
- "bibliographic database" I have not changed this, but there might be people who are not clear on what a bibliographic database consists of, while "displays information about the titles, authors, and publications" is hard to misunderstand. Not a major issue, however.
- Thanks for your revisions. -DES Talk 15:17, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
- Based on personal observations, a significant number of people (at least in the US) are not quite sure what the term "bibliography" means and confuse it with "biography" or something else. The percentage is probably lower in countries where the word "Bibliothèque" (or its derivatives) is common. Granted, we will be contacting people who own and maintain bibliographic sites, so chances are that they will be familiar with the term, but on the other hand it's entirely possible that our e-mail will be originally handled by a clerk or a techie with no bibliographic background. You can never be too careful! :) Ahasuerus 17:14, 12 May 2008 (UTC)