Anthony DeRobertis wrote:
On Sunday, Aug 10, 2003, at 18:49 US/Eastern, Sergey V. Spiridonov wrote:Such cases should pass both program and documentation DFSG restrictions.I'm going to assume for a moment that if something is program-DFSG free, it'll be documentation (DFDG, maybe?) free as well.
Since documentation differs from programs, it can have different restrictions, which programs are not able to pass.
This would pretty much mean only ASCII and maybe HTML documentation is subject to the documentation guidelines. DocBook, TeX, PostScript, etc. are all either clearly programming languages (they are Turing-complete) or have a source and compiled form.
So, being just Turing-complete can't serve as a criterion. > Notably, the GNU manuals are written in TeX. So they'd be subjected to > the DFSG. So creating a documentation version would accomplish.... > nothing. -- Best regards, Sergey Spiridonov