"A GNU package should not refer the user to any
non-free documentation for free software."
As far as this issue goes ...
The coding standards themselves mention "Standard C". The C Standard is
not free documentation. Admittedly there is no direct link or citation,
but I don't see why that matters; a link is just a matter of
convenience, it doesn't affect the fact that something nonfree is being
referred to.
My interpretation is that there is a practical exception to the nonfree
rule; just as we're allowed to mention widespread nonfree things like
"Windows" and "Solaris", we're allowed to mention widespread nonfree
standards, like C, HTML, and so forth. The Open Group stuff would
certainly fall into that category.
I am not inclined to bring this up with rms for an explicit
clarification.
I have no particular opinion on the registration issue. I certainly
agree it would be best, in terms of usability, for the Open Group to
provide a usable permanent link, and not require registration, and
thus obviate the problem.
_______________________________________________
bug-gnulib mailing list
bug-gnulib@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-gnulib
