I agree, but the disadvantage would only be that if such a tag would be purged (removed from all sentences after improvement) the first user to add it again to a sentence wouldnt have te auto-complete function. I think if we write down which tag has which puropse then its not a big thing.

I just wrote "http://example.com/thats_the_url" and seperated the ":" so it didnt destroy the link, but it's not part of the link. So there's nothing special about "by Isaac Asimov", at least no special character.

Sed ne de mi. :-P

Nigdy nie mogłem odsłuchać zdań na tej witrynie internetowej. Ja też używam Firefox, i dla mnie mówi, że "The QuickTime plugin has crashed."

I don't understand what are your aspirations there,
I don't see what's there for you to win or lose,

I only see what there to lose for the project.

But I'm only giving my best to try to understand these business I don't know much about.

Then what about contributing link-makers? If moderator linked two sentences, according to your logics, he also should be contributed.

Note: I actually don't have any opinion myself about cc-y/cc-y-sa as nowadays my contribution to the content is very limited (and even my overall content contribution is now only a very little part of the total content), as soon as it suit the "community" opinion

The licence of the data itself is not really important in a developer point of view, as I can create my "close" code dictionnary feeded by "open" dictionnaries, (search on the android/iphone market how many chinese-english dictionnary software, free or not, do reuse for the data the cc-cedict project which is actually cc-by-sa) and as long as they attribute it, it's perfectly legal, the only things the "share-alike" add is that if they mix for example cc-cedict and handedict (also under cc-by-sa), they need to release somewhere they're resulting dictionnary under cc-by-sa.

in theory what Demetrius said is absolutly right http://wiki.creativecommons.org...ulting_work.3F
but the actual situtation make that most of the current "open" culture ecosystem has chosen cc-by-sa, which make tatoeba a "provider" but that can't be feeded by these projects , so in way it "closes" us from the content of these projects

as said, personnaly I'm both fine with cc-by and cc-by-sa, as anyway I don't consider the content of tatoeba as "mine" (though i will not say the same about the code :P) , this post is mainly to provide more information for those of the community who have never really been interested by these "copyright/copyleft" issues

Note 2 : at first my original post was mainly to also talk about a more important need to swtich licence from cc-by 2.0 to cc-by 3.0

+1

CC-BY should indeed be compatible with CC-BY-SA!

I do however favor additional licences that are similar to CC-BY. Im not an expert but what about the GPL?

Actually the seemed to not be that "non-willing" to respect the "attribution" part of the licence as there's an obvious tatoeba icon near the sentence, I will contact them if you want in order to put in addition to this the name of the author of the sentence.

http://glosbe.com/en/de/Muiriel

this site is france based.
glosbe is poland based.

When I search for "Muiriel" in Glosbe, I see example sentences we translated! This is a crime, we should contact Glosbe to remove our sentences in this site (tatoeba), from their sites.

cntrational
Thank you for asking this question :-)

Some linguists consider Amazigh (or Berber) as ONE language which has various dialects. Others (especially Anglosaxon linguists) consider it as a "group of different languages". We, as the speakers of the language consider that OUR LANGUAGE IS ONE AND HAS ONE NAME, TAMAZIGHT.

The unity of our language DOES EXIST. Since the birth of our cultural and identity revival in the early 20th century, we have been talking about Amazigh culture and language, and all efforts meant for the standardization of our language refer to the Amazigh language as ONE.

In the recent years, Moroccan and Algerian governments granted official status for the language and they always refer to it as the Amazigh language (and not "languages" :-)

Intercomprehension between the speakers of the different dialects varies from area to area, but we can say without risk that ALL the dialects of the Northern part of North Africa (Nefoussa [western Libya], Shawi [Northeast Algeria], Kabyle [Northeast Algeria], Chenoui [West Algeria], Mozabite [Central Algeria] and all of the Moroccan dialects) are intercomprehensible.

There are only three dialects that are very different from the mainstream Amazigh, and these are the Tuareg (Sahara), Ghadames dialect (Northwest Libya) and the Zenaga dialect (southwest Mauritania).

In television shows of Amazigh-speaking channels, you can see a host speaking a dialect and a group of hosts, each speaking a different dialect, and yet, they make a superb program in which they communicate without any problem. Communication between the speakers of the various Amazigh dialects is similar to that between UK and US English-speakers. The only missing thing is the standardization (or what we commonly refer to as "unification") of our language.

Tanemmirt s tussda (= Thank you very much)
:-)

Sysko:

Oh !!! Thank you very much Sysko :-D

Thanks a million !!!

Shame on me, I have forgotten my brothers in the southern Tunisia :-) That's right ... There are others in the oasis of Siwa, in Northwest Egypt and another group in Southwest Mauritania (the Zenaga Berbers) ^v^ Let me teach you the two mostly used words in our language: "Azul" (hello) and "Tanemmirt" (thank you)

^v^
Omar

Thank you very very much Jakov !!!

I'm a native speaker of Amazigh (Berber) and I can contribute with tens of thousands of sentences translated from 5 different languages (English, French, Spanish, Arabic and Italian).

I'll follow your instructions,
Thank you
Omar

Et Glosbe ne respecte pas les termes de la licence CC_BY qui oblige à citer l'auteur...