[cc-licenses] [ot] opendocument
daniel.carrera at zmsl.com
Thu Nov 17 20:05:55 EST 2005
Mia Garlick wrote:
> Thanks for the provision of different formats & discussion about the
> ideal format.
> To try to focus people's attention on the substance of my posting, I've
> attached a version in PDF.
I've read the change. My first impression was "I like it a lot". My
second impression was, "hmm... I wonder what the FDL says".
I like the change. Some people will argue that this is more confusing
because you have to know the FDL to if you want to know what you're
offering. I'd like to pre-emptively respond that this is a necessary
price to pay for addressing the license incompatibility issue. We just
have to prefer which is the lesser of two evils.
My vote would be in favour of the change.
Now, if in addition, the FDL was also modified to allow sharing with
BY-SA work, that would be a *very* exciting change indeed!
Making BY-SA compatible with FDL would be very cool.
Making BY-SA and FDL mutually compatible would be ultra amazingly cool!!
I think the CC people are making a spectacular move. I'd like to thank
the people in charge for this. This is truly leading the way towards a
truly free culture. Sorry if my comment about OpenDocument made it look
like I wasn't paying attention to the real work. I just needed some time
to read over and digest the nature of the change. I couldn't be more
supportive of this move.
/\/_/ No trees were harmed in the creation of this email.
\/_/ However, a significant number of electrons were
/ were severely inconvenienced.
More information about the cc-licenses