How is that different from: "[...] if there is content that is *only* encumbered by the encoding, we should embrace [...]"
On Tue, Jun 9, 2009 at 12:26 AM, Jussi-Ville Heiskanen <[email protected] > wrote: > Brian wrote: > > Pretty sure we are saying the same thing - what part of my comment struck > > the wrong chord with you? > > > I think it is the " we should accept free content in any format." > bit. ;-) > > On Tue, Jun 9, 2009 at 12:18 AM, Jussi-Ville Heiskanen < > [email protected] > > > >> wrote: > >> > > > > > >> Brian wrote: > >> > >>> I hold the same sort of pragmatic view. In the absence of freely > licensed > >>> content encoded in a free format we should accept free content in any > >>> format. I think it would take a revolution within the Foundation staff > >>> > >> and > >> > >>> the most vocal parts of the community (note that I did not say > majority), > >>> though. > >>> > >>> > >> I think this is the exact opposite of what I wished to convey. > >> > >> I do not hold we should accept non-free content. I don't hold > >> that view. Period. > >> > >> But if there is content that is *only* encumbered by the > >> encoding, we should embrace and liberate it from those > >> bonds. > >> > >> That is all. > >> > >> > >>> It seems like a lot less work to solve the recoding > >>> problem, and anyway, there is a lot of content that has yet to be > >>> produced to worry about. Sticking to the ideals no matter what will > >>> help more of that free content in free formats be produced in the > >>> future when there are more people around to do the > >>> creating. > >>> > >>> On Mon, Jun 8, 2009 at 10:17 PM, Jussi-Ville Heiskanen < > >>> > >> [email protected] > >> > >>>> wrote: > >>>> > >>>> > >>> > >>>> Tim Starling wrote: > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>> Some people in the community take the view that supporting > proprietary > >>>>> standards, as an option alongside free standards, weakens the ability > >>>>> of the free standards to compete for mindshare and client support, > and > >>>>> thus that it shouldn't be done. We would have to have that > discussion, > >>>>> and possibly a vote on the issue, before deployment of any software > >>>>> solution. But the software should come first, at the very least it > >>>>> will be useful to support alternate free formats such as Dirac, Speex > >>>>> and FLAC. > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>> I don't know who "Some people in the community" are, > >>>> but just in case they are anything like myself, who does > >>>> hold a view not entirely distant from the one you describe... > >>>> > >>>> The one thing I would say is that gettin unencumbered > >>>> material that was only encumbered by the encoding it was > >>>> being carried by to formats that are free, is a net plus, no > >>>> matter if it meant we were also carrying the encumbered > >>>> format version. > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> Yours in deep amity; > >>>> > >>>> Jussi-Ville Heiskanen > >>>> > >>>> _______________________________________________ > >>>> foundation-l mailing list > >>>> [email protected] > >>>> Unsubscribe: > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>> _______________________________________________ > >>> foundation-l mailing list > >>> [email protected] > >>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l > >>> > >>> > >>> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> foundation-l mailing list > >> [email protected] > >> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l > >> > >> > > _______________________________________________ > > foundation-l mailing list > > [email protected] > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > foundation-l mailing list > [email protected] > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l > _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
