From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Org schemas we talked to be non-free, was: [ELPA] New package: repology.el Date: Mon, 25 Jan 2021 17:06:38 +0200 Message-ID: <83o8hd2gzl.fsf@gnu.org> References: <83zh0y2jtu.fsf@gnu.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="8169"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: rms@gnu.org, bugs@gnu.support, ulm@gentoo.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org, ams@gnu.org, arthur.miller@live.com, dgutov@yandex.ru To: Ulrich Mueller Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Mon Jan 25 16:08:43 2021 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1l43Tv-00022T-Av for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Mon, 25 Jan 2021 16:08:43 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:48000 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1l43Tu-00086y-6F for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Mon, 25 Jan 2021 10:08:42 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:46262) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1l43S9-0006qK-BM for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 25 Jan 2021 10:06:57 -0500 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]:51930) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1l43S7-0004NA-LQ; Mon, 25 Jan 2021 10:06:51 -0500 Original-Received: from 84.94.185.95.cable.012.net.il ([84.94.185.95]:1418 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1l43Rp-0006Mc-Qr; Mon, 25 Jan 2021 10:06:34 -0500 In-Reply-To: (message from Ulrich Mueller on Sun, 24 Jan 2021 21:36:54 +0100) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "Emacs-devel" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:263386 Archived-At: > From: Ulrich Mueller > Cc: Jean Louis , ulm@gentoo.org, rms@gnu.org, > dgutov@yandex.ru, ams@gnu.org, arthur.miller@live.com, > emacs-devel@gnu.org > Date: Sun, 24 Jan 2021 21:36:54 +0100 > > >>>>> On Sun, 24 Jan 2021, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > > >> > Only a special class of derivative works can be distributed freely, > >> > and it sounds like some of these would fall under "fair use" anyway. > >> > Certainly this isn't enough to qualify as a free software license? > >> > > >> > However, this document itself may not be modified in any way, > >> > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > >> > including by removing the copyright notice or references to OASIS, > >> > except as needed for the purpose of developing any document or > >> > deliverable produced by an OASIS Technical Committee (in which case > >> > the rules applicable to copyrights, as set forth in the OASIS IPR > >> > Policy, must be followed) or as required to translate it into > >> > languages other than English. > >> > >> Then it is not free. > > > Forgive me for a possibly naïve question, but why on earth would you > > want to modify a schema? > > I think the core question isn't if the files can be modified, but if > their license allows including them with a free software package. Where does the stuff that you quoted disallow that? > At least if you apply the usual criteria mechanically, I believe the > answer would be "no". I very much hope that we don't apply anything of this kind mechanically. > > It's the same as modifying a physical law. Would you say that E = mc² > > is "non-free" because it cannot be meaningfully modified at will? > > That's an awful analogy. Why "awful"? A physical law describes some part of the reality, and an XML schema describes a certain kind of documents and data types. > For example, you can modify (i.e. generalise) the formula to E² = > p²c² + m²c⁴ for an object with nonzero momentum. :-) A schema can be similarly "generalized" (a.k.a. "extended") without changing it: you include the schema in your own and then add your own data types and conditions.