-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 09/12/07 04:30, Josselin Mouette wrote: > Le mercredi 12 septembre 2007 à 04:19 -0500, Ron Johnson a écrit : >> Except for "fixing typos", none of what you seem to propose seems >> to my humble eyes to be modifying the base document. Give the new >> document a derived name, indicating the changes. Inside the >> document, clearly define what changes you've made to the base document. > > Sorry, but the license doesn't allow that.
Which license? I've looked a a few RFCs, and they each seem to have a different (sometimes non-existent) license. All, though, seem to say, "Distribution of this memo is unlimited." It would be useful to show John and I some specific examples of RFCs that don't allow any reformatting or translation derivations. >> Bottom line: being able to willy-nilly change protocol specification >> base documents seems, to me, to be One *Stupid* Idea. > > A license requiring modified versions to be clearly marked as such, with > a changed name, would definitely be considered free, and still wouldn't > encourage such practice. > > Not being able to draft derived versions of specifications is another > plain stupid idea. Since when can't you draft derived versions? RFC 1725 is (quoting the text) "primarily a minor revision to RFC 1460", which in turn is (again quoting the text) "primarily a minor revision to [RFC1225]", which itself in turn is based on ideas from RFCs 918, 937, and 1081. - -- Ron Johnson, Jr. Jefferson LA USA Give a man a fish, and he eats for a day. Hit him with a fish, and he goes away for good! -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFG57nIS9HxQb37XmcRAoWNAKChDDGPj43Phjo05v7BI4k5kFgfWQCfUrHN DQzTvuwhyf7Dbponv2CyDhA= =WrRK -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
