[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: various opinions on Debian vs the GFDL

On Thu, May 01, 2003 at 01:53:14PM +0300, Richard Braakman wrote:
> The definition of a Transparent copy is so implementation-specific
> that a sound file can never be part of a GFDLed document.  I think
> this is a significant restriction on modification.

I can't see how that's even meaningful. How do you make a soundfile part
of a text document?

You could accompany the GNU FDL document with a sound file, you could
link a sound file from a GNU FDL web page... Making a GNU FDL document
into something that's entirely sound (ie, reading it out, and including
some sound effects), could matter, but that's just an opaque copy, and I
don't see how you'd have any problems just including a transparent copy
of the stuff that's not the sound effects on your CD.

What's stopping you from doing all your music in some XML format, anyway?
Apart from good sense, I mean. Forcing you to convert mp3s to XML (so
that they're editable with a text editor) doesn't seem all that much
worse than having to distribute changes in patch format.


Anthony Towns <aj@humbug.org.au> <http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/>
I don't speak for anyone save myself. GPG signed mail preferred.

  ``Dear Anthony Towns: [...] Congratulations -- 
        you are now certified as a Red Hat Certified Engineer!''

Attachment: pgpLt747fcTEj.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: