Re: [rms@gnu.org: Free Software Needs Free Documentation]
Hi,
>>"Guy" == Guy Maor <maor@ece.utexas.edu> writes:
Guy> Manoj Srivastava <srivasta@datasync.com> writes:
>> [Everybody following a different standard would make standards
pointless.>
Guy> Yes, of course everybody will agree with you there.
Guy> But isn't innovation important? If I come up with a new
Guy> modified standard, and prominently plaster big warnings all over
Guy> it that this isn't the original standard, why shouldn't I be
Guy> allowed to distribute it? Why shouldn't I be allowed to
Guy> distribute patches so that programs follow this new standard?
Guy> What if my idea is a good one and the standards body see it and
Guy> incorporates it into the next standard?
Well, it is, I think, fear of the above (profusion of
standards, etc). In most cases standards bodies have not operated in
this fashion. People have put up implemntations that go beyond the
standard, and the standards body looks at current and prior art and
incorporates the innovations into the standard.
I personally would not like to allow a standard I create to be
readily modifiable, for what that matters. If you got ideas, feed 'em
to me -- and I see about getting them into the standard.
Guy> Is innovation of standards only allowed to come from the specified
Guy> standards committee itself?
The innovation, no. The next version of the standard, yes.
>> There is always a loss of information when translation
>> occurs.
Guy> Manoj, you certainly don't allow anybody to get away with even the
Guy> tiniest of generalities.
Oh, sorry. ;-)
Guy> Of course there is a loss of information when translation
Guy> occurs. But surely you're not saying that translations are bad?
No, I'm not. What I am saying is that I can see authors not
wanting their baby to be modified and distorted, and releasing
standards under no-modification-or-translation terms, and I do not
see this as a threat to the community, indeed, it is not even
detrimental.
As long as one may create a standard that borroes from the
inital standard, but is distinct, and has a distinct name, I think it
is OK to allow the document into main.
I am not really talking about ideal licencing here (marcus and
RMS and co are doing that). I am talking about wht I think is
detrimental to the community, and shold not be in main, and what I
think does not harm the community, and, IMHO, should be allowed into
Debian.
manoj
--
A Tale of Two Cities LITE(tm) by Charles Dickens A lawyer who looks
like a French Nobleman is executed in his place. The Metamorphosis
LITE(tm) by Franz Kafka A man turns into a bug and his family gets
annoyed. Lord of the Rings LITE(tm) by J.R.R. Tolkien Some guys take
a long vacation to throw a ring into a volcano. Hamlet LITE(tm) by
Wm. Shakespeare A college student on vacation with family problems, a
screwy girl-friend and a mother who won't act her age.
Manoj Srivastava <srivasta@acm.org> <http://www.datasync.com/%7Esrivasta/>
Key C7261095 fingerprint = CB D9 F4 12 68 07 E4 05 CC 2D 27 12 1D F5 E8 6E
Reply to: