tin gherdanarra <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Anybody in the know here?
I am not a lawyer, and I have not employed the service of one, but I suspect that LispWorks has. Their copy of the HyperSpec should have a legally correct license clause: http://www.lispworks.com/documentation/HyperSpec/Front/Help.htm#Legal Unfortunately, the license includes two highly problematic clauses: * Permissions related to performance and to creation of derivative works are expressly NOT granted. * Permission to make modified copies is expressly NOT granted. So while I agree with you that an updated, annotateable HyperSpec (perhaps with cross-implementation compatibility notes) would be a great boon to the community, I'm afraid such a thing will not happen, unless LispWorks can be convinced to release the HyperSpec under a more liberal license. On the bright side, I don't see why they should be opposed to such a thing - the creation of derivative HyperSpecs wouldn't exactly cut into their profits in any way I can think of, and I assume it would be in the interest of every Lisp vendor, to make it easier to find documentation for the language. -- \ Troels "Athas" Henriksen /\ sigkill.dk/blog (Danish) _______________________________________________ Gardeners mailing list [email protected] http://www.lispniks.com/mailman/listinfo/gardeners
