W3C Specs reformatted

Discussion in 'HTML' started by Ilkka Huotari, May 15, 2004.

  1. Ilkka Huotari, May 15, 2004
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Ilkka Huotari

    Karl Groves Guest

    Karl Groves, May 15, 2004
    #2
    1. Advertising


  3. > Why is there blue, underlined text on your site that IS NOT a link?


    Something from conversion, fixed.

    --
    Ilkka Huotari
    Ilkka Huotari, May 15, 2004
    #3
  4. Jukka K. Korpela, May 15, 2004
    #4
  5. I followed these instructions here, which were linked from the HTML 4.01
    mainpage:
    http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Legal/copyright-documents-19990405

    However, this copyright statement is a bit confusing:
    - It grants the "use" and "distribution" of the material.
    - It doesn't allow modifications or derivatives. Are my versions
    derivatives? I haven't changed the content, what one might think a
    derivative means?

    Ok, I will ask W3C for the permission and take these offline now.

    --
    Ilkka Huotari


    "Jukka K. Korpela" <> wrote in message
    news:Xns94EAE0BA17736jkorpelacstutfi@193.229.0.31...
    > "Ilkka Huotari" <> wrote:
    >
    > > Here are some W3C specs reformatted (HTML 4.01, CSS):

    >
    > Did you really get W3C's permission? If you did, it would be appropriate
    > to make a note of this, to avoid misunderstandings.
    >
    > Publishing W3C specs as reformatted is generally _not_ permitted. See the
    > explicit statement at
    > http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Legal/IPR-FAQ-20000620#format
    >
    > --
    > Yucca, http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/
    > Pages about Web authoring: http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/www.html
    >
    >
    Ilkka Huotari, May 15, 2004
    #5
  6. Ilkka Huotari schrieb:

    > I followed these instructions here, which were linked from the HTML 4.01
    > mainpage:
    > http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Legal/copyright-documents-19990405
    >
    > However, this copyright statement is a bit confusing:
    > - It grants the "use" and "distribution" of the material.
    > - It doesn't allow modifications or derivatives. Are my versions
    > derivatives? I haven't changed the content, what one might think a
    > derivative means?


    Well, in the document Jukka linked to, they claim that publishing the
    specs in a different format is a derivative work, so by that definition
    your works ARE derivatives. This kind of restriction does seem a bit
    extreme to me, but I'm sure they had this checked by a copyright lawyer.

    This whole thing is a double-edged sword, of course. The W3C WANT their
    specs published and used as widely as possible, so it's in their best
    interest to have people like you take the initiative and put the specs
    in a potentially useful format. On the other hand, they also need to
    keep control of what happens to the specs and how they are
    redistributed. So they have to place those restrictions.

    Personally, I think your idea is great. Just ask them for permission -
    and let's hope it doesn't take months for them to reply!


    Matthias
    Matthias Gutfeldt, May 15, 2004
    #6
  7. > This whole thing is a double-edged sword, of course. The W3C WANT their
    > specs published and used as widely as possible, so it's in their best
    > interest to have people like you take the initiative and put the specs
    > in a potentially useful format. On the other hand, they also need to
    > keep control of what happens to the specs and how they are
    > redistributed. So they have to place those restrictions.


    Agree.

    > Personally, I think your idea is great. Just ask them for permission -
    > and let's hope it doesn't take months for them to reply!


    Thanks. We'll see how it goes.

    Ilkka
    Ilkka Huotari, May 15, 2004
    #7
  8. Ilkka Huotari

    B r ia n Guest

    On Sat, 15 May 2004 21:41:02 +0200, Matthias Gutfeldt
    <> wrote:

    >Well, in the document Jukka linked to, they claim that publishing the
    >specs in a different format is a derivative work, so by that definition
    >your works ARE derivatives. This kind of restriction does seem a bit
    >extreme to me, but I'm sure they had this checked by a copyright lawyer.


    That particular FAQ asks if they can publish in a *different* format
    (e.q. PDF) so I assume that they only want you to ask for permission
    when changing to PDF/DOC/PDB/Etc..

    just the way I see it though, doesn't mean it's right =)

    --
    The more laws and order are made prominent,
    The more thieves and robbers there will be.
    --Lao-tzu
    B r ia n, May 15, 2004
    #8
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Java_Forum

    Struts question reformatted !!!

    Java_Forum, Sep 20, 2003, in forum: Java
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    435
    James
    Sep 22, 2003
  2. Frank
    Replies:
    9
    Views:
    1,543
    David Dorward
    May 3, 2004
  3. Its Just the Devil

    X-Tract: Create a reformatted XLM file...

    Its Just the Devil, Nov 7, 2003, in forum: XML
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    440
    Its Just the Devil
    Nov 7, 2003
  4. AnnMarie
    Replies:
    8
    Views:
    423
    kaeli
    Nov 21, 2003
  5. yb

    w3c specs

    yb, Nov 17, 2005, in forum: Javascript
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    84
Loading...

Share This Page