"The source code for a work means the preferred form of the work for making modifications to it." If the upstream has lost the .doc file that was originally used to produce .html and .pdfs for some fortunately non-most-recent versions of a program, can I say that .html that does exist is preferred over .doc that does not exist and that therefore the .html is now the source for those versions? A lot of people still edit .html by hand. I have done it myself and there are tools like emacs and bluefish to do it. htmldoc converts the .html file to .pdf beautifully. But honestly I wish the upstream had not lost the .doc file...... I also wish it was .odt instead of .doc.... Another question, in the case where the upstream has not lost the .doc file, if I convert it to docbook and begin editing it with a view to creating man and info pages, does that make the docbook the new source? Should both be included??? -- Paul Elliott 1(512)837-1096 pelliott@BlackPatchPanel.com PMB 181, 11900 Metric Blvd Suite J http://www.free.blackpatchpanel.com/pme/ Austin TX 78758-3117
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.