Timwi wrote:
He already said that. He wanted to re-read the block page. That is a perfectly legitimate thing to want. Also, by the GFDL, users *must* be able to retrieve the source code of a page.
I have no comment about the rest of this thread, but I wanted to point out that this is not true. What is required by the GFDL is *not* that people be able to retrieve the source, but that they are able to get a "Transparent" copy.
The actual readable text presented in your browser *is* the transparent version. You can cut and paste it into a generic text editor.
So whether or not this is a bug or a feature, there are zero license implications at stake here.
--Jimbo