On Thu, Oct 14, 2010 at 7:36 PM, William Waites <[email protected]>wrote:
> On 10-10-14 19:27, Peter Murray-Rust wrote: > > > > * repect the quality of information. This is not always possible but > > copy and re-use should use best endeavour to preserve things such as > > character encoding, technical information, quality of graphics. It is > > unacceptable to distribute corrupted information which is attributed to > > someone not responsible. > > I think it is perfectly acceptable to degrade information > - perhaps changing graphics to a lower resolution for use > on low-bandwidth links. What is not OK is doing this > without a reference to where the original can be obtained > and some explanation of what was done (here's the need again > for provenance metadata which is more than just attribution). > > Quite accepted. These norms - assuming some get some general support would really be guidelines asking people to be aware of the need to consider. Here's where graphics degradation actually transmits factually incorrect infomation http://wwmm.ch.cam.ac.uk/blogs/murrayrust/?p=42 - but I'm not labouring the point. P -- Peter Murray-Rust Reader in Molecular Informatics Unilever Centre, Dep. Of Chemistry University of Cambridge CB2 1EW, UK +44-1223-763069
_______________________________________________ okfn-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/okfn-discuss
