Posted Jul 5, 2002 by World Service Memoryshare team
I like the idea of expanding the 'Edited by' credit list. Particularly ordering them with newest Researcher at the top. Or should we put the most recently active ones at the top. That way as you work your way down the list you're more likely to find someone who is still on site. There are a couple of things that concern me though. One is the fact that subs are not subs forever, and the Edited by slot conveys a 'responsibility' for that entry. Some of the subs on older entries are long gone, and so there would be no-one to contact about the minor updates, which brings me on to the next topic...
|
 
|  | |
|
|
Posted Jul 5, 2002 by Frankie Roberto
"I like the idea of expanding the 'Edited by' credit list."
I like the idea of there being space for more than one sub-editor. I feel if people work on editing an updated entry then they really ought to get an 'edited by' credit rather than a writer/researcher credit (I still feel I deserve an editor credit for A398955, which I subbed). I think that the ordering idea is quite confusing though, it seems fairer to me to just list people equally.
Alternatively, if that's not technically feasable, perhaps we could have a new 'Updated by' credit list.
Development-Features has this to say about credit lists:
"More Contributor Fields - Have four fields for each entry: Editor (one person), Author (one person and the originator of the piece), Co-writer (list), and Thanks to (list)."
..though that doesn't leave much room for extra editor-credits.
|
| | |
|
|
Posted Jul 9, 2002 by World Service Memoryshare team
Let's try and go for an updated by list then, as that will be what the updater will be doing...
|
| | |
|
|
|
|
Key |  |  |
A: An older reply to the parent Posting
B: The parent Posting, to which this is a reply
C: A newer reply to the parent posting
D: The first reply to this Posting
| | |
Click on this icon to make a complaint about a specific Posting | |
Home
Reply
