After thinking about John's response, I've realized that those works should
go into public domain (actually, under CC-BY, as Serbian laws don't
recognize PD outside strictly defined "works not created by author" in the
sense of laws and other similar works; it's been explicitly stated that
"moral r
On Sun, Feb 22, 2015 at 11:51 PM, Milos Rancic wrote:
> I would actually say: Is there a point to have a prescriptive work
> without ND clause?
Course there is. The text of the CC licenses, for example, is under CC0;
"Creative Commons" is trademarked and that trademark is used to prevent
misuse
> >> and Wikisource projects typically have *revision* patrolling enabled
> >> to help catch incorrect changes.
> >
> > Revision patrolling is less bulletproof than a checksum, but if it is
> > enough for the people who care about this normative grammar's integrity,
> > it's certainly enough for me
On Mon, Feb 23, 2015 at 11:46 PM, Amir E. Aharoni
wrote:
>> > But since Milos asked: In Wikisource changing the original is indeed
>> > vandalism, but somebody must notice that it's vandalism. AFAIK
> Wikisource
>> > doesn't have a proper way to authenticate that the document is in its
>> > origin
> > But since Milos asked: In Wikisource changing the original is indeed
> > vandalism, but somebody must notice that it's vandalism. AFAIK
Wikisource
> > doesn't have a proper way to authenticate that the document is in its
> > original form.
> Could you elaborate on this? If you open the links
On Mon, Feb 23, 2015 at 1:23 PM, Amir E. Aharoni <
amir.ahar...@mail.huji.ac.il> wrote:
>
> Another example from the Free software world is TeX, which can be relevant
> here: It is released under a Free license, and modification is allowed, but
> modified versions cannot be called "TeX". See
> htt
On Mon, Feb 23, 2015 at 11:23 PM, Amir E. Aharoni
wrote:
>> > But, my initial point was: Am I missing something? Would there be any
>> > reason why such grammar would have sense without ND clause?
>
>> Milos,
>
>> Could we not import these works onto Wikisource in original format,
>> where they wo
> > But, my initial point was: Am I missing something? Would there be any
> > reason why such grammar would have sense without ND clause?
> Milos,
> Could we not import these works onto Wikisource in original format,
> where they would be preserved without permitting altering from the
> original?
Just a short note before I think about this: Dictionaries are free and
there is a lot of sense having them under a free license (will be CC-BY). I
am talking about Normative Grammar of Serbian Language here.
On Feb 23, 2015 9:31 AM, "John Mark Vandenberg" wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 23, 2015 at 6:51 PM
On Mon, Feb 23, 2015 at 6:51 PM, Milos Rancic wrote:
> Which, actually, reminds me that we definitely need a "non-free"
> repository. For example, we could get that grammar to be quoted in
> whole, but there is no sense to change it.
>
> But, my initial point was: Am I missing something? Would the
On Mon, Feb 23, 2015 at 8:43 AM, Oliver Keyes wrote:
> I'm finding this a bit difficult to parse; am I interpreting it correctly
> if I read it as: because the project is to produce a prescriptive,
> normative grammar, there's a desired No Derivatives element of any adopted
> license to prevent th
On Sunday, 22 February 2015, Milos Rancic wrote:
> As some of you know, we are working on the project [1] with Matica
> srpska [2]. Basically, that opens numerous possibilities and here is
> one of them.
>
> My professor, a Board member of Matica srpska and one of two
> co-authors of the Normativ
As some of you know, we are working on the project [1] with Matica
srpska [2]. Basically, that opens numerous possibilities and here is
one of them.
My professor, a Board member of Matica srpska and one of two
co-authors of the Normative Grammar of Serbian Language wants to open
the Grammar.
Befo
13 matches
Mail list logo
