On Saturday 21 August 2004 19:23, Maksim Orlovich wrote:
> > No semantic changes are done: It's meaning and content is not touched.
>
> Really? Then why in the world is the title changed? 

Good question. IIRC, it was inconsistently used and people often refer to it 
as the "HIG". I don't really care. I'll change it; "Human" to "User".

> Also, the copyright 
> notice is patently false; the document was originally written in 1999,

I'll add that.

> after all, and I am not sure you can consider its authors as going under
> "KDE Usability team".

There's no copyright, author info or licensing info available at the old site, 
AFAICT. One possibility is to make all who have touched the document(cvs 
annotate) copyrighters, but it feels unnecessary. Then there's always the 
issue who "deserve" to be the copyrigher etc. etc -- I find "KDE Usability 
Team" an easy way out. From a juridical perspective it doesn't work, but that 
problem is all over the place and not a concern to my judgment.
How do you suggest it should be corrected?


			Frans