Re: Documentation licenses (GFDL discussion on debian-legal)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
On 3 Dec 2002, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
> Documentation *must* change to adapt to software, if the software can
Well, if we're going to be as strongly judgmental as that, I'ld much rather
it were expressed the right way round -- software *must* change to conform to
the freedom to modify digitally-encoded documents.
(Whatever may be represented by the encoding -- procedures described in
natural or formal language; time-based audio or video documents;
three-dimensional objects scanned in as a series of co-ordinates -- etc.
In their digitally-encoded form, all are no more than 'documents'.)
This of course requires the renaming and re-couching of terminology of DFSG
(Debian Free Software Guidelines) to DFDG (Debian Free Document Guidelines) --
software in its digital form being a document like any other -- and I hereby
propose that this be done.
It's about time we moved forward on this to be as comprehensive as possible.
> I write free software *and* English prose, and I have made sure that
> the English prose *is* freely modifiable, provided proper credit and
> change notification takes place.
Likewise. [I also write copyrighted material.] We have no difference of
opinion -- just a different skew on our individual viewpoints. You would
appear to be software-centric; I am quite definitely document-centric. (In
other words, I don't care quite quite so much about the document content. As
long as I am allowed to examine it and if so desired, modify it. And this for
those documents, and *only* those documents which I or others choose to
release under a 'free' licence.)
Martin Wheeler - StarTEXT / AVALONIX - Glastonbury - BA6 9PH - England
GPG pub key : 8D6B948B ECC6 D98E 4CC8 60E3 7E32 D594 BB27 3368 8D6B 948B
- Share your knowledge. It's a way of achieving immortality. -
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.0 (GNU/Linux)
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----