Please, give more detailed breakdown on creators of items

Object + Textures + Scripts + Notecards = Item

But, currently Object Creator = Item Creator, regardless if the person actually created all of it.

Please, list the creators of each component part in an item.











Don't think it really needs a more detailed explaination, even though the effects of this feature might generate a bit of discussion. Apologies if it's already been suggested, which it no doubt has.

i guess you can get this info by right clicking the contents but it would be more convenient to have it listed some place. nice for gushing complements at the person who scripted the great object and not the person who rezzed the cube it's in. oh and the whole Rate > Creator thing.

One related complication: suppose you go into the Scripting Library forum and find a fabulous script someone has been kind enought to post. The normal way to use this code is to then go create a new script in SL and paste the forum code in. Since you create the script object, you will be listed as the creator, despite the fact that you wrote none of the code.

Likewise, if multiple people collaborate on a pose or a sound or something, there would be no way to credit them.

If you want a "roll credits" feature that is really intended to comprehensively annotate the sources of an item, you would want to have a way to deal with these cases.

I strongly support this. (Big surprise, right?)

Regarding the scripting library issue, move the scripting library inworld so people can get those scripts in object form, and we can see original author (and subsequent mods) just fine with this kind of system. Ideally it should be part of the easier to use "find object for sale" feature they keep talking about.

Pose, Sound, etc. should be dealt with by the original proposal -- just list all the creators of any of the contents. Heck, when you click "rate," you already get a whole pie with only two pieces in use. Plenty of room for expansion there.

neko

Neko,

I copied this idea outright from a post of yours that I saw in another thread.

The permissions on your post were not restricted for copy or transfer, so don't you dare start castigating me for it

I guess I had that coming!

I think this would really help with my primary concern. I still think "no modify" shouldn't let you take things apart and use the pieces (very counterintuitive), but I also think most objects shouldn't need to be "no modify."

Anyway, thanks for keeping up the constructive discussion.

neko

I'm sorry, I don't follow you here at all -- maybe my post wasn't very clear. The original proposal says list the creator for each component, but what I was asking about here was if a single component is a collaboration between 2 or more people. How would this be credited?

A better example would be the classic open source methodology, where any given piece of code certainly starts with one person, but after a few iterations, there may be many people who contribute to it. Generally speaking, the goal is to encourage collaboration, so the more the merrier.

Even a single credit for each component would be better than nothing, but I got the impression that the goal was to be a comprehensive way of crediting all the creators of an object, so I thought I would mention that case.

Strangeweather, does it often happen that more than one person collaborate on a pose? This seems more likely to me to occur with a script.

It would be difficult to track, in any case, but if one could specify a list of creators on any component, and the list would accumulate to show all creators on the object as a whole, that would be a big help.

neko

What's this? I agree with something? Anyone see the four horsemen around?

** RUBBER STAMP **

APPROVED

I'm all for a cycle of creators, aka "giving credit where credit is due". A good example is the Mahjong table, who some think Ananda Sandgrain entirely did. She did a marvellous job with the artbuild, but the scripting was a Xylor Baysklef collaborative job. So there's an example of a dynamic duo.

It would be pretty cool to release a library of freeware, modifiable poses on the web that others could use as starting points for developing their own poses. If more people had acces to Poser, I expect this would happen.



Agreed, it would would be a big help.

While we're at it, don't start telling everyone that Foo Bar made my house just because I happened to link my house to Foo Bar's single-prim door or window.