Re: RFC about copyrights and right package section for W3C docs.

2001-09-18 Thread Francesco P. Lovergine
On Sat, Sep 15, 2001 at 10:42:59AM +0200, Robert Bihlmeyer wrote: > "Francesco P. Lovergine" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > In order to package HTML 4.01 specification from www.w3c.org > > Please have a look at doc-html-w3. Maybe you should even take it over, > the current maintainer is missin

Re: RFC about copyrights and right package section for W3C docs.

2001-09-18 Thread Francesco P. Lovergine
On Sat, Sep 15, 2001 at 10:42:59AM +0200, Robert Bihlmeyer wrote: > "Francesco P. Lovergine" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > In order to package HTML 4.01 specification from www.w3c.org > > Please have a look at doc-html-w3. Maybe you should even take it over, > the current maintainer is missi

Re: RFC about copyrights and right package section for W3C docs.

2001-09-16 Thread Robert Bihlmeyer
[cc and reply-to more appropriate list] Richard Atterer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Sat, Sep 15, 2001 at 10:42:59AM +0200, Robert Bihlmeyer wrote: [doc-html-w3] > > That package is in non-free. IIRC the issue is that you can't modify > > the standards. Which is somewhat understandable, but s

Re: RFC about copyrights and right package section for W3C docs.

2001-09-16 Thread Robert Bihlmeyer
[cc and reply-to more appropriate list] Richard Atterer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Sat, Sep 15, 2001 at 10:42:59AM +0200, Robert Bihlmeyer wrote: [doc-html-w3] > > That package is in non-free. IIRC the issue is that you can't modify > > the standards. Which is somewhat understandable, but

Re: RFC about copyrights and right package section for W3C docs.

2001-09-15 Thread Richard Atterer
On Sat, Sep 15, 2001 at 10:42:59AM +0200, Robert Bihlmeyer wrote: > "Francesco P. Lovergine" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > My guess is that all docs can be part of `main' and can be > > distributed on cd-rom with appropriate copyright notice. > > That package is in non-free. IIRC the issue is th

Re: RFC about copyrights and right package section for W3C docs.

2001-09-15 Thread Richard Atterer
On Sat, Sep 15, 2001 at 10:42:59AM +0200, Robert Bihlmeyer wrote: > "Francesco P. Lovergine" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > My guess is that all docs can be part of `main' and can be > > distributed on cd-rom with appropriate copyright notice. > > That package is in non-free. IIRC the issue is t

Re: RFC about copyrights and right package section for W3C docs.

2001-09-15 Thread Robert Bihlmeyer
"Francesco P. Lovergine" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > In order to package HTML 4.01 specification from www.w3c.org Please have a look at doc-html-w3. Maybe you should even take it over, the current maintainer is missing-in-action. > My guess is that all docs can be part of `main' and can be >

Re: RFC about copyrights and right package section for W3C docs.

2001-09-15 Thread Robert Bihlmeyer
"Francesco P. Lovergine" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > In order to package HTML 4.01 specification from www.w3c.org Please have a look at doc-html-w3. Maybe you should even take it over, the current maintainer is missing-in-action. > My guess is that all docs can be part of `main' and can be >