[Top][All Lists]

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

[DS-discuss] GFDL (was: Re: debian and rms)

From: Ramanan Selvaratnam
Subject: [DS-discuss] GFDL (was: Re: debian and rms)
Date: Sat, 30 Aug 2003 01:26:39 +0100
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.4) Gecko/20030624

Rahul Sundaram wrote:

windows sucks is not a childish statement by itself
but if put under say apache howto to satisfy the
author's thrust becomes childish. if added under
invariant becomes irrelevant non free and non
removable. any fdl'ed doc is allowed to have invariant
sections essentially leaving a option for parts of it
to contain non modifiable sections.

Incorrect. Any non modifiable section? No! Only what is defined as 'Secondary Section'

do take time to read the fdl completely

'A "Secondary Section" is a named appendix or a front-matter section of the Document that deals exclusively with the relationship of the publishers or authors of the Document to the Document's overall subject (or to related matters) and contains nothing that could fall directly within that overall subject. (Thus, if the Document is in part a textbook of mathematics, a Secondary Section may not explain any mathematics.) The relationship could be a matter of historical connection with the subject or with related matters, or of legal, commercial, philosophical, ethical or political position regarding them.'

If a nutter wrote a good manual on Apache so be it. I will use it if there is a need for it and acknowledge the author as a nutter if I can be bothered to read up his/her rant.

If you publish or distribute Opaque copies of the
Document numbering more than 100, you must either
include a machine-readable Transparent copy along with

Sorry I was not astute enough to understand what was 'machine readable' and that you were referring to the content. it all wrong in my previous mail.

I understand the need for Transparent copies and am sure you do too.
My prefered example of Opaque copy will be printed material (ie  in paper).

each Opaque copy, or state in or with each Opaque copy
a computer-network location from which the general
network-using public has access to download using
public-standard network protocols a complete
Transparent copy of the Document, free of added
material. If you use the latter option, you must take
reasonably prudent steps, when you begin distribution
of Opaque copies in quantity, to ensure that this
Transparent copy will remain thus accessible at the
stated location until at least one year after the last
time you distribute an Opaque copy (directly or
through your agents or retailers) of that edition to
the public.
It is requested, but not required, that you contact
the authors of the Document

this means that every encrypted copy should be
accompanied by a non encrypted one.

I guess, encryption might be useful to ensure the integrity of the content (any other use?) and would qualify as Opaque copy . Then by its electronic nature I do not see how distribution of a non encrypted version alongside it will be a problem. Anyway would it not be the case that as soon as the encryption is deciphered one will have the source or simply be pointed to a URL for the source?

Most importantly let us remembe this is for a number > 100.
OK this might be a constraint of freedom when compared to the GPL'ed software model) but I guess this is the special arrangement that will make publishers take up the GFDL. No?

Best regards,


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]