Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="woodelf" data-source="post: 1584012" data-attributes="member: 10201">The coloring one occured to me, too. A project i'm working on half-heartedly (it's pretty low on the priority list) involves huge swaths of OGC, much of which has PIed widget names, making IDing that much harder. So my thought was to color-code it: literally put the entirety of the derived text in non-black, and match those colors to the Sec.15 entries. And then a brief explanation. From a citation standpoint, it'd be ideal: you instandly know when looking at some text whether or not it was derived, and exactly how much of it was derived (since additions/alterations wouldn't keep the citation color), and could trivially look at the legal page to see where it came from. Obviously, only really cost-effective for a PDF product, as doing color ink for that alone would be ridiculous. And i'm doing it on an experimental project, because it may turn out to be completely horrible to read--i haven't laid out enough of it yet to decide.I also like the idea of line-numbering the copy of the WotC OGL in your work, and then using the line numbers of the Sec.15 entries as citation numbers wherever a bit of reused OGC appears in the work.[quote[I don't think there are any publishers who are against citation.</blockquote>Sure there are: WotC. That whole clause is there so that you can't say "compatible with Dungeons & Dragons" without getting permission from them to say so. Otherwise, you wouldn't have to abide by the restrictions of the D20STL, because you could get that compatibility recognition legally.Don't forget, if it's a revision of the existing license, all material already released would be reuseable under the new license. (and material released under the new version would be reusable under the old version, too.)[/QUOTE]

Verification