Re: scrollkeeper omf files

[Malcolm Tredinnick <malcolm commsecure com au>]

On Tue, 2003-12-23 at 03:11, Slobo wrote:
> Дана пон, 22-12-2003 у 02:56, Malcolm Tredinnick је написао:
[...]
> > > 5. What to do with "holder" attribute of "rights" element - to mention
> > > translator's name or original person(organisation) name?
> > 
> > You can have multiple 'rights' entries, so make a new one for your
> > translation. This is the correct way to do it in all cases, since your
> > copyright claims are different from those of the original author. For
> > example, the original document might be copyright 2001 - 2003, whereas
> > the translated version may only have been done in 2003, so its copyright
> > year is different as well.
> 
> I suppose you are here talking about this "copyright" element that
> translator should add to gtranslator.xml - in this case:
> 
> <copyright>
>   <year>when translator did translation</year>
>   <holder>translator's name</holder>
> </copyright>
> 
> It (date of translation) is not included in omf unless you suggest to do
> that this way:
> <rights type="GNU FDL" license.version="1.1" holder="All rights
> reserved, **2003** translator's name"/> or "date" element in omf refers
> to translation date and not original document creation date?

Sorry, I was being unclear. The year issue is just an example of why
your copyright claims are pretty much always going to be different from
those of the original author. In the document itself you will have a
separate copyright notice (as you describe) and therefore you should
also add an extra rights element in the OMF, rather than replacing the
existing one.

As for the correct usage of the date element in an OMF description, I am
not really sure about that.

Cheers,
Malcolm