[seqfan] Re: Attribution

[Klaus Brockhaus]

  ALexander,

I do not see what

* avoidance (or even removal) of extension lines that describe small 
changes of an OEIS entry like typo correcting, inserting a period at the 
end of a definition, comment, formula, crossref line, changing brackets 
to parentheses, replacing a comma with a semicolon or vice versa, and 
the like

has to do with

* OEIS popularity, user (i.e. reader) interface, transparency, "Look and 
Feel" of the OEIS, except for those whose look-and-feel depends on the 
number of appearances of their name in the database.

Regards
                     Klaus


Am 04.12.2010 15:31, schrieb Alexander P-sky:
> If there is a desire to retain OEIS established popularity and also
> there is an intention not to loose "older generation" audience (to
> which great number of mathematicians still belong),
> which will choose not to "relearn" in order to get accustom to the new
> wiki style interface,
> then in my opinion the transition to OES wiki should be absolutely
> transparent to such users and the "Look and Feel" of the classic OEIS
> interface be preserved at least as the option.
>
> ARP
> =======================================
> On 12/4/10, Hans Havermann<pxp at rogers.com>  wrote:
>> The "extensions" section of a sequence has a lot of options and a
>> casual user might think that if they correct a spelling mistake, say,
>> they are obligated to add "edited by" in the extensions. The wiki
>> "history" shows what is done by whom. Correct? So what is the intent
>> and future of our current plethora of attributions in the various
>> sections and especially, now, in the "extensions"?
>>