At 12:37 AM 8/20/00 -0500, Will Hindmarch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Secondly, it allows for precision in the Opening of the author's material.
>Not just "carved," if you will, but "surgically" removed. While it may not be
>possible for every product under the OGL to utilize colored sidebars or whatnot,
>product-specific terms can identify any applicable signage indicating OGC. Each
>OGLed product would have a sort of key or legend indicating where to find OGC,
>just as Tynes does. Anything remains the property of the author until further
>notice.
Personally, I think the community will hold in most esteem the stuff that is
most open. Publishing a work with a bunch of alternating open and closed
sections sounds like a distraction for the readers and a disincentive to
make use of the work or any portion of it.
>From a consumer's standpoint, if I'm reading something that's part closed
and part open, I'd like the smaller part to be an appendix (or something
similar), not a bunch of small sidebars throughout the work. For example,
a closed module could be published with an open section at the end describing
new monsters and spells that can be shared.
Rogers Cadenhead
E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Web: http://www.prefect.com
-------------
For more information, please link to www.opengamingfoundation.org
