Re: suggestion: DFDG - Debian Free Documentation Guidelines [was: Discussion - non-free software removal]

[tb@becket.net (Thomas Bushnell, BSG)]

Matt Zimmerman <mdz@debian.org> writes:

> On Wed, Nov 13, 2002 at 06:11:04PM -0800, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
> 
> > Matt Zimmerman <mdz@debian.org> writes:
> > 
> > > This kind of modification is not useful for standards documents, which are
> > > meant to provide a sufficiently robust description to facilitate the
> > > development of interoperable implementations, and not to document software.
> > > If you modify a piece of software which implements a standard, you do not
> > > make corresponding modifications to the standards document.
> > 
> > This assumes that the only purpose of a standards document is to
> > describe the standardized practice.  This is incorrect.
> 
> What useful purpose are you suggesting which is discriminated against by
> this license?

I already gave one.  Using a *different* but related protocol, and
wanting to document it by copying and modifying the RFC.