Teach people about the licenses more (sorry for being so non-specific).
Auto-create attribution suggestions that include title, author, link to user profile, link to art piece, license(s) name and link to license(s) for easy copying to make it easier to use art legally.
Make OGA accessible (especially the upload form and the audio section for people without eyesight). For this, it might be possible to get funding from for-handicapped organizations.
Properly integrate with twitter, facebook, ideally g+, identi.ca and diaspora "page" feeds. Fix image previews (this includes giving bg color to audio preview images, curretnly they are white on transparent). For proper thumbnail display, see opengraph. One example of how to use can be seen at https://github.com/qubodup/jylattfy/blob/gh-pages/index.html Proper social network integration is crucial to growth.
Just some random suggestions. :)
PS: if kickstarter is going to be used, it might be a good step to start using a real face avatar throughout the web. Recognizability and trust come to mind.
PPS: 1. At the top of the art request forum put a table of suggested prices. 2. Give the option to artists that fill free art request jobs to donate 10% of their earnings to OGA in return for a "For the Community!" medal (in the art work submission on OGA?) as thanks for the forum allowing offer and artists to find each other.
Hi, it's great that you ask for clarification on licenses.
To me, the question is not clear. Could you include what you are trying to do and why (the license requirement, as per your interpretation)?
So far I'm under the impression that you think there is a need to give attribution or share what you use on OpenGameArt? You should give attribution in the game credits. You can first list the art submission and then the specific filename of what you used for example.
I consider the learning and work required for publishing an open source project on a site intended for that purpose to be adequate.
OGA users should not have to stand confusing search results based on software developers' unwillingness to invest effort into properply positioning their work.
Supporting software hosting is a potential moderation effort that I dont' see any return benefits in. EDIT: conidering how much benefits software projects gain from being located on a dedicated project hosting site with revision control which allows forking etc.
OGA can instead support developers by giving instructions for the easiest possible way to set up a repo that supports uploads for distributing binaries. It is probably enough to say "don't upload software here, use [link to list of open soruce hosting options] instead" though.
Every submission on OGA needs to be an art asset of the categories that OGA provides. I realized that this case could be solved logically, if the submission gets turned into the submission of an example of the resulting asset (text, I assume) and the software gets included under an open source license as 'source')
PS: I won't continue objecting, thanks for clearly stating your position, BartK!
Hosting software on OGA, rather than on a software hosting solution, disturbs OGA search results. There is no Software category and there should not be.
If you feel that OGA should make it easy to find content generation software, then make a suggestion on how to achieve this without distrubing the art pool with a type of data that has no place on OGA.
The site is designed to help people find art. If they are looking for art generators they will ask on the forums or use a search engine.
Instead of uploading software to OGA, one should upload samples of what the software generates and link to the software in the description.
Cool!
What are the website terms of use? Do I own full copyright over every image I create in this website tool?
In chrome, I don't have the "save image as" option when right clicking the tumb.
"Inspect element" doesn't display anything.
I am supposed to only be able save a low-resolution image?
Very cool! Only things missing are a browser favicon and sounds :)
I wanted to share the website on Facebook but it generated no preview image and I didn't want to waste my "friends"' time so I wrote a blog post about how to fix this instead: http://qubodup.wordpress.com/2013/05/02/game-website-basics-favicon-and-facebook-image-preview-opengraph-for-social-websites-like-reddit-google-plus/
RE: Social Network integration
https://www.facebook.com/pages/Opengameart/502428436446188?fref=ts currently looks like this: http://i.imgur.com/Oe3bGtF.png (no preview images)
having proper meta elements in the html should solve this by telling facebook etc "this is the image you should use as a preview": [[[ meta property="og:image" content="http://opengameart.org/image.png" / ]]] See https://github.com/qubodup/jylattfy/blob/gh-pages/index.html
Teach people about the licenses more (sorry for being so non-specific).
Auto-create attribution suggestions that include title, author, link to user profile, link to art piece, license(s) name and link to license(s) for easy copying to make it easier to use art legally.
Make OGA accessible (especially the upload form and the audio section for people without eyesight). For this, it might be possible to get funding from for-handicapped organizations.
Properly integrate with twitter, facebook, ideally g+, identi.ca and diaspora "page" feeds. Fix image previews (this includes giving bg color to audio preview images, curretnly they are white on transparent). For proper thumbnail display, see opengraph. One example of how to use can be seen at https://github.com/qubodup/jylattfy/blob/gh-pages/index.html Proper social network integration is crucial to growth.
Just some random suggestions. :)
PS: if kickstarter is going to be used, it might be a good step to start using a real face avatar throughout the web. Recognizability and trust come to mind.
PPS: 1. At the top of the art request forum put a table of suggested prices. 2. Give the option to artists that fill free art request jobs to donate 10% of their earnings to OGA in return for a "For the Community!" medal (in the art work submission on OGA?) as thanks for the forum allowing offer and artists to find each other.
Hi, it's great that you ask for clarification on licenses.
To me, the question is not clear. Could you include what you are trying to do and why (the license requirement, as per your interpretation)?
So far I'm under the impression that you think there is a need to give attribution or share what you use on OpenGameArt? You should give attribution in the game credits. You can first list the art submission and then the specific filename of what you used for example.
Hope this helps!
Green is poison or antidote?
Yellow is energy (like, for running)?
Very pretty! Drawn on paper, scanned in and overpainted in GIMP?
I consider the learning and work required for publishing an open source project on a site intended for that purpose to be adequate.
OGA users should not have to stand confusing search results based on software developers' unwillingness to invest effort into properply positioning their work.
Supporting software hosting is a potential moderation effort that I dont' see any return benefits in. EDIT: conidering how much benefits software projects gain from being located on a dedicated project hosting site with revision control which allows forking etc.
OGA can instead support developers by giving instructions for the easiest possible way to set up a repo that supports uploads for distributing binaries. It is probably enough to say "don't upload software here, use [link to list of open soruce hosting options] instead" though.
Every submission on OGA needs to be an art asset of the categories that OGA provides. I realized that this case could be solved logically, if the submission gets turned into the submission of an example of the resulting asset (text, I assume) and the software gets included under an open source license as 'source')
PS: I won't continue objecting, thanks for clearly stating your position, BartK!
Hosting software on OGA, rather than on a software hosting solution, disturbs OGA search results. There is no Software category and there should not be.
If you feel that OGA should make it easy to find content generation software, then make a suggestion on how to achieve this without distrubing the art pool with a type of data that has no place on OGA.
The site is designed to help people find art. If they are looking for art generators they will ask on the forums or use a search engine.
Instead of uploading software to OGA, one should upload samples of what the software generates and link to the software in the description.
There is a massive infrastructure for open source software:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_open_source_software_hosting_facilities
Pages