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

Re: research on using the GFDL



Karsten Wade wrote:

>One problem I am hearing about occurs if we include the
>"Acknowledgements" or "Dedication" section, we may greatly reduce the
>freedom of our document.  In this matter I defer to the debian-legal
>list for all the reasoning.  Here is a page that appears to cover all
>the details:
>
>http://people.debian.org/~srivasta/Position_Statement.html
>
>Because the GDSG doesn't include any Invariants or other immutable
>content, we are fully free to use it.  Similarly, our GFDL is nicely
>fully free.
>
>Anyway, I don't want to seek legal advice unless we can't find a clear
>precedent of how to act.  It's seeming clear, so far.
>
>cheers - Karsten
>  
>
Whew!! Boy, that sounds like fun. ;)

So should we be referring to the LDP Author Guide as the preferred
document model? At least in the context of new releases.

i.e. "expected" hierarchical structure

http://tldp.org/LDP/LDP-Author-Guide/html/index.html

This guide already provides for compliance with the GFDL, and has been
verified by the FSF.

Within section A.1 of the above resource, there are numerous templates
for various documentation structures that the editorial team can review
for application in fedora-docs.

Thomas


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