On Mon, Feb 23, 2015 at 8:43 AM, Oliver Keyes <ironholds(a)gmail.com> wrote:
I'm finding this a bit difficult to parse; am I
interpreting it correctly
if I read it as: because the project is to produce a prescriptive,
normative grammar, there's a desired No Derivatives element of any adopted
license to prevent the field from being populated with multiple, similar
works that would confuse things and undermine the point of the project?
I would actually say: Is there a point to have a prescriptive work
without ND clause? While it's quite fine for descriptive works -- and
I am sure that at some point of time we'd get one of the descriptive
grammars (at least the latest descriptive Syntax of Serbian Language,
made by the same professor) -- I am doubtful about usefulness of a
prescriptive work without ND.
Which, actually, reminds me that we definitely need a "non-free"
repository. For example, we could get that grammar to be quoted in
whole, but there is no sense to change it.
But, my initial point was: Am I missing something? Would there be any
reason why such grammar would have sense without ND clause?