File talk:Water molecule dimensions.svg

I don't think the GFDL-self tag should be used here, as this is a noncreative transformation (or could be argued derivative work) of the original PNG image. I'm not sure of the licensing issues here, but I'd like it if someone could clarify them.

In any case, to be faithful to the original, the same font (Arial/Arial Black) should be used for all labels. Dysprosia 12:45, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

It seemed pretty straightforward... the original PNG was GFDLed, so I released my derivative also under GFDL. As far as being "faithful" to the PNG - why? I aim to create the best image to serve its purpose, not to be a perfect duplicate of the original. ~ Booya ^Bazooka 12:54, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

I do not know about the licensing issue, but about the font I agree with Booya. Why should you copy the original exactly if you think the new version is of better quality. /Daniel78 21:34, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

I think the GFDL-self tag implies in a way that you are the original author of the work since it states that the author releases the work into the GFDL, not making a derivative. Derivative works need not be relicensed under the GFDL if I understand the GFDL properly, as they must be in the GFDL anyway. I am not 100% sure about the GFDL licensing requirements, which is why I ask. I think the GFDL tag would be more appropriate?

On the other point, the font for the angstrom symbol is still in Arial/a sans-serif font while the font for the H and O labels are in a serif font. That doesn't look right. They should be the same font, preferably a sans-serif font. It is an artistic issue. Dysprosia 22:17, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

I don't care at all on the GFDL vs GFDL-self question. Anyone, change it if you want. As for the font, I did that intentionally. The H and O texts are in a different font style because they represent different kinds of labels from the degree and distance quantities. I'd need more convincing there. ~ Booya ^Bazooka 23:35, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

I was mainly making sure which was appropriate re the license rather than preference; my suggestion is based on my interpretation of the GFDL license (which is really rather complicated, I regret explicitly releasing the image under that license ;)

Re fonts: I am not saying that the fonts should be identical, but they should be ideally taken fron the same font family (I had used Arial Black and conventional Arial in the original image), or alternatively/failing that, should both be sans-serif. It doesn't really make sense to use completely different fonts because it's not internally consistent. Dysprosia 07:07, 9 January 2007 (UTC)