I think the second term in your Princeton Wordnet citation is the one we are aiming for: e.g. "principles".
One can have principles without rules. In that respect principles are like a practical exposition of "values". (The word "values" would lead us into a separate quagmire, so I suggest avoiding that word.) Bill On Wed, 2006-08-02 at 23:59, Dominic Lachowicz wrote: > Jeff, > > > As an aside, it was never intended to be "legislation" or "rules", and every > > time it's painted as such, it says more about the poster's attitude than the > > CoC's intent (not that you have done so in this mail, but others have done > > so recently on the list). > > If it's not intended to be "legislation" or "rules", I'd suggest not > calling it a "code". It's got legislation and rules builtin to its > name. If your argument is that these are "shared community values", > better to call it that instead. Unless you want these to be enforced > community rules, in which case, call a spade a spade and don't be > ashamed of it. > > http://wordnet.princeton.edu/perl/webwn?s=code > code: "a set of rules or principles or laws (especially written ones)" > > Best, > Dom > -- > Counting bodies like sheep to the rhythm of the war drums. > _______________________________________________ > foundation-list mailing list > foundation-list@gnome.org > http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list _______________________________________________ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list