On Thu, 28 Nov 2002 17:57:35 +0200 Richard Braakman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 28, 2002 at 02:58:38PM +0100, Tim Dijkstra wrote: > > > UnicodeData is different, because we need the data in our program, > > > not only the ideas. And it this case we see that as software! > > > > Maybe you're right that we don't really need the rfc's in main. They > > actually are now and it would be a shame if we dropped them. But we > > need files like this unicode file in main, which is part of a > > specification(I think), so can't be altered. > > But do you think it's _okay_ for such a file not to be free? (Whether > it actually is or not is a topic for debian-legal). > What I mean to say is that it's useless to demand that you can modify a 'standard', so yes, I think it's OK that it is DSFG non-free. What is the use of changing this unicode table, but not telling the rest of the world? grts Tim
