[Foundation-l] Mission & Vision statement update
wikilegal at inbox.org
Thu Apr 26 17:58:29 UTC 2007
On 4/26/07, Jussi-Ville Heiskanen <cimonavaro at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 4/26/07, Florence Devouard <Anthere9 at yahoo.com> wrote:
> > I do not think anyone can reasonably claim that the change came as a
> > total surprise. The issue of updating the mission statement has been
> > mentionned as early as october 2006.
> Quite the contrary, I most specifically claimed that the specific
> emendation of "free licence" to "free content licence" was made in a
> fashion that did not observe the niceties of feedback from the
> community in any reasonable form. That "change" is the only *change*
> that I am challenging, and _yes_ I do think it is reasonable to claim
> that it will have not been reviewed by any great section of the
> community in any significant way.
Am I the only one who is confused as to what the significance of the
change from "free license" to "free content license" means? I've read
the discussion by you and Erik on this, but I still don't get it.
Erik says this is a clarification. What was unclear which is being clarified?
Jussi-Ville says that the change eliminates "content in formats that
are under free licence". What would be an example of such content?
Does this mean the WMF would support non-free content under an open
format? Or are you saying that the new language allows for free
content in non-free formats?
More information about the foundation-l