Re: Boilerplate copyright agreement for commercial exploitation
On Mon, 2006-05-15 at 14:32 +0100, Alan Cox wrote: > On Sul, 2006-05-14 at 19:52 +0200, Dave Neary wrote: > > Since lawyers talk .doc, and use revision control to track changes to the > > documents, that's what we ge too. > > Disappointing. I hope the foundation will reconsider that decision and > post its documents in open formats as well. This is not the final agreement that will get posted to foundation.gnome.org; this is a friendly RFC from Dave on this list. Federico ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: Boilerplate copyright agreement for commercial exploitation
On Mon, 15 May 2006 15:35, Alan Cox wrote: On Llu, 2006-05-15 at 10:19 -0400, Dominic Lachowicz wrote: > Stick to your "open formats" argument; it serves you better. ODT makes > no guarantees that the documents will look the same across renderers > or platforms. If the apps used exactly the same layout algorithms with > the same fonts, ligature handling, etc. then sure. But they don't. Yes but the embedded macros don't do things like print $1000 one day and $10 the next That's why the final agreed upon document is the one in PDF and/or PS formats that look exactly like the signed paper copies, not the "working draft" that gets passed to and fro and certainly won't look the same 3 years from now. ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list -- Carlos Morgado - chbm(a)ma.ssive.net - http://chbm.net/0x1FC57F0A FP:0A27 35D3 C448 3641 0573 6876 2A37 4BB2 1FC5 7F0A ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: Boilerplate copyright agreement for commercial exploitation
On Llu, 2006-05-15 at 10:19 -0400, Dominic Lachowicz wrote: > Stick to your "open formats" argument; it serves you better. ODT makes > no guarantees that the documents will look the same across renderers > or platforms. If the apps used exactly the same layout algorithms with > the same fonts, ligature handling, etc. then sure. But they don't. Yes but the embedded macros don't do things like print $1000 one day and $10 the next ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: Boilerplate copyright agreement for commercial exploitation
- A ".doc" file may render in many different ways, especialy if it contains macros. Which is definitive, the contract as rendered by MS Word or by Abiword or by OpenOffice ? Stick to your "open formats" argument; it serves you better. ODT makes no guarantees that the documents will look the same across renderers or platforms. If the apps used exactly the same layout algorithms with the same fonts, ligature handling, etc. then sure. But they don't. If you want visual consistency without regard for semantic markup, use a format that was designed for it, like PDF or TIFF. If you want semantic markup that will be handled uniformly across editors, use ODT. 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
Re: Boilerplate copyright agreement for commercial exploitation
On Llu, 2006-05-15 at 15:25 +0200, Dave Neary wrote: > I can certainly post a copy in ODT later in the week which gets converted into > .doc every time we need to go to the lawyers... I won't always have the time > to > do it promptly, though. > > I will note that there are several high-quality free software programmes that > can read and write the bits of the .doc format which are important for > lawyers. - There are open standards, and GNOME is an open standards based body - A ".doc" file may render in many different ways, especialy if it contains macros. Which is definitive, the contract as rendered by MS Word or by Abiword or by OpenOffice ? Alan ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: Boilerplate copyright agreement for commercial exploitation
On 5/15/06, Dave Neary <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Selon Alan Cox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > On Sul, 2006-05-14 at 19:52 +0200, Dave Neary wrote: > > Since lawyers talk .doc, and use revision control to track changes to the > > documents, that's what we ge too. > > Disappointing. I hope the foundation will reconsider that decision and > post its documents in open formats as well. I can certainly post a copy in ODT later in the week which gets converted into .doc every time we need to go to the lawyers... I won't always have the time to do it promptly, though. I will note that there are several high-quality free software programmes that can read and write the bits of the .doc format which are important for lawyers. That doesn't make them open formats. Luis (agreeing with Alan in general, sorry, Dave) ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: Boilerplate copyright agreement for commercial exploitation
Selon Alan Cox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > On Sul, 2006-05-14 at 19:52 +0200, Dave Neary wrote: > > Since lawyers talk .doc, and use revision control to track changes to the > > documents, that's what we ge too. > > Disappointing. I hope the foundation will reconsider that decision and > post its documents in open formats as well. I can certainly post a copy in ODT later in the week which gets converted into .doc every time we need to go to the lawyers... I won't always have the time to do it promptly, though. I will note that there are several high-quality free software programmes that can read and write the bits of the .doc format which are important for lawyers. Cheers, Dave. -- Dave Neary Lyon, France ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: Boilerplate copyright agreement for commercial exploitation
On Sul, 2006-05-14 at 19:52 +0200, Dave Neary wrote: > Since lawyers talk .doc, and use revision control to track changes to the > documents, that's what we ge too. Disappointing. I hope the foundation will reconsider that decision and post its documents in open formats as well. Alan ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
