> Isn't the hyperspec very close to the ANSI final draft also? Yes.
> And isn't the legal status of the hyperspec much more clear? Yes, but it's not encouraging: http://www.lisp.org/HyperSpec/FrontMatter/About-HyperSpec.html#Legal > Would it be possible to start with that as a base instead? As matters stand, they took the trouble to explicitly prohibit derivative works, so I'm guessing probably not. Unless they've had a change of heart, that legal section is one of the least friendly sounding I've run across. It may be that this is a consequence of restrictions they agreed to in negociations with ANSI, but I don't know the history so that's just a guess. I'd rather try to locate original contributors (who hopefully are not likely to be worried about work ten years old and already available both publicly and free via FTP and as part of ANSI Common lisp for $18) than try and convince whoever put in all of those "rights specifically not granted" clauses. Maybe I'm wrong though - I suppose we could ask, but I have a feeling there is some kind of ANSI deal tied up with the hyperspec, among other concerns. Cheers, CY __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com _______________________________________________ Gardeners mailing list [email protected] http://www.lispniks.com/mailman/listinfo/gardeners
