On Tue, May 12, 2009 at 11:19 PM, Dave Crossland <[email protected]> wrote: > > I feel strongly that "open" is also confusing because it doesn't bring > to mind the primary goal, freedom, and this has concrete disadvantages > like not publishing source files.
"Open" is open to abuse, yes. > He and I have been discussing this for at least 2 years, and it seems > we are unlikely to resolve this difference. We both agree that "libre" > solves both our problems, and although it introduces problems of its > own - it is not a native English word, and so the meaning must be > explained to most people - we are happy to focus on that term as a > compromise. Libre is good. Or you could say "free and open". > Another alternative is to refer to our fonts as "FLOSS fonts" instead > of "libre fonts." FLOSS is the perfect compromise in that nobody likes it. ;-) - Rob.
