Development of Creative Commons licenses

[Mia Garlick <mia AT creativecommons.org>]

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.

Regards,

Mia Garlick
CC General Counsel

Attachment: FDLcompatibilitylanguage4-0001.pdf
Description: Adobe PDF document

On Nov 17, 2005, at 1:21 PM, Daniel Carrera wrote:

> Antoine wrote:
>
>
> > Actually, for non graphically heavy documents, RTF is certainly  
> > the best
> > choice for interoperability.
>
> But there isn't a single version of RTF, and RTF is controlled by
> Microsoft. It's certainly better than word, but it's not fantastic.
>
>
> > ODT is only supported by a few very recent office suites, perhaps  
> > only
> > OOO 2.0
>
> OOo and KOffice both support it, and another 20 applications (not all
> office suites) are either supporting it or working towards it.
>
> http://opendocumentfellowship.org/Applications/HomePage
>
> Another note on RTF (and .doc) is that both are going to become
> obsolete. Everyone, including Microsoft, is moving to XML. The
> competition in the future will be between OpenDocument and Microsoft's
> propietary XML (which will cause much stronger lock-in than .doc).
> Promoting OpenDocument now is a good strategy.
>
> Cheers,
> Daniel.
> --
>       /\/`) http://oooauthors.org
>      /\/_/  http://opendocumentfellowship.org
>     /\/_/  No trees were harmed in the creation of this email.
>     \/_/   However, a significant number of electrons were
>     /      were severely inconvenienced.
> _______________________________________________
> cc-licenses mailing list
> cc-licenses AT lists.ibiblio.org
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/cc-licenses