[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: lynx-dev Referring to non-free documentation for non-free software
From: |
Larry W. Virden |
Subject: |
Re: lynx-dev Referring to non-free documentation for non-free software |
Date: |
Mon, 1 Feb 1999 12:53:46 -0500 (EST) |
> If "should not" (ie "we'd really prefer if you didn't"), then
> they're nice, but carry no legal force, I would guess.
> "May not" would make it a lot clearer, if that is what you
> REALLY intend; it might also strike fear into the hearts, and
> fsf-agreement-signing-hands, of lots of free-software
> (or is it open-software?) programmers.
> Or MAYBE you WANT to keep it ambiguous? (Thus leaving it up to
> a judge to decide what the intent was?)
Note as well that both of these terms may have culturally different
interpretations "may not" to me suggests a possibility - "should not"
suggests a stronger recommendation. "Must not" to me suggests imperative
commands.
I interpreted the rest of the message as meaning "where I say should,
I mean must"...
--
Larry W. Virden <URL: mailto:address@hidden>
<URL: http://www.purl.org/NET/lvirden/> <*> O- "No one is what he seems."
Unless explicitly stated to the contrary, nothing in this posting should
be construed as representing my employer's opinions.