On 2003-09-21 14:29:54 +0100 Richard Stallman <rms@gnu.org> wrote:
The DFSG explicitly > codifies my specific decision about TeX,=20It does nothing of the sort; there is no mention of the word 'TeX' inthe DFSG. Section 4 does precisely that, though without mentioning TeX by name.
Please state your preferred definition of "explicit"[*]. It would seem that section 4 requires deduction that TeX is being considered. That is, it is left to implication, is implicit.
The GFDL is free according to our standards.
I do not believe the FDL is free software according to your standards. I am annoyed that FDL supporters continue to waste time by pouncing on every piece of imprecise language from someone with the consensus view. I hope that FDL fans will see from above how annoying it is.
[*] This was just making the point below. Please, if you must state your preferred definition, do it off-list.
-- MJR/slef My Opinion Only and possibly not of any group I know. http://mjr.towers.org.uk/ gopher://g.towers.org.uk/ slef@jabber.at Creative copyleft computing services via http://www.ttllp.co.uk/