Re: What's the plan for the user guide?

[Simos Xenitellis <simos74 gmx net>]

O/H karderio έγραψε:
> On Sat, 2006-02-04 at 14:06 +0000, Joachim Noreiko wrote:
>   
> > --- Simos Xenitellis <simos74 gmx net> wrote:
> >     
> > > Care to back this up? (URL?)
> > >       
> > http://live.gnome.org/DocumentationProject_2fTasks
> > http://mail.gnome.org/archives/gnome-doc-list/2005-October/msg00014.html
> >
> > Though surely this title business is a
> > misinterpretation of the license? Otherwise it's plain
> > nuts.
> >     
>
> I would guess that it was a misinterpretation, as
> http://mail.gnome.org/archives/gnome-doc-list/2005-October/msg00014.html
> talks of "derivative documents". However the GFDL talks about changing
> the title for "modified versions"... Therefore it would seem that the
> title must be changed...
>
> I would think that adding a version number at the end of the title would
> not legally be considered changing the title, but rather keeping the
> same title with an appended number. I think we may as well shed the
> version number, as I don't think adding this exposes us any less to
> legal threats.
>
> That said, the current user-guide does not seem to respect a few other
> things that the GDFL imposes :
> * List authors on title page
>   
Hello,
In GFDL (http://www.gnu.org/licenses/fdl.txt), Section 4, item B, 
referring to the listing of the authors on the title page, it says
"..., unless [the authors] release you from this requirement."
Are the authors happy without their names on the title page?
The default stylesheets for DocBook XML (html and print) do place the 
author names with their affiliation on the title page.
> * "State on the Title page the name of the publisher"
>   
This is a requirement for modified versions. Are we on this state for 
the user guide?
The default DocBook XML stylesheets do not appear to place the publisher 
on the title page. They place it on the face of the second physical page.
> * Add a copyright notice for modifications
> * The legal notice (GDFL license text or reference) does not seem to be
> user visible (GNOME 2.12)
>   
The TLDP has an author's guide which has template documents. It's easy 
to fix these ones, like pasting the <legalnotice></legalnotice> text.
http://www.tldp.org/LDP/LDP-Author-Guide/html/index.html
> I would agree that the GFDL is just not meant for the task we are using
> it for. 
>   
In this case I would be interested to see an alternative. Perhaps 
debian-legal could make up a Debian Documentation License for this.
I think this mail,
http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2006/02/msg00001.html
puts the situation in perspective.
The thread there is quite active.

Simos