At 08:37 AM 1/23/03 -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The OGL requires only that OGC be "clearly indicated". I think the only reasonable way to interpret it is to assume that, "for those that have the appropriate mechanical and linguistic facilities to access a particular document, can they ascertain which parts of the data are OGC and which aren't?"While I don't disagree with you 100%, I think you're on sort of a slippery slope. Already between PDF and Access DBs, you're talking about a huge difference in accessibility: the former is a commodity format, for which there are dozens of applications on almost every platform. The latter is pretty closely tied to one app from one company on one platform.
At what point this side of a binary-coded-decimal message in an EBCDIC representation of a Ukranian translation of your OGC declaration, which can be extracted from your document with a utility available on your company web site, and runs only on the Amiga, does this sort of thing cross the line into unreasonable? (Assuming that we can agree that my example is well over the line.)
Sixten
_______________________________________________
Ogf-l mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.opengamingfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ogf-l
