[Home]Public Domain Resources/Foldoc license

HomePage | Public Domain Resources | Recent Changes | Preferences

No diff available--this is the first major revision. (no other diffs)
Received: from diver.doc.ic.ac.uk
	by mail.metrostate.edu; Fri, 24 Aug 2001 17:41:40 -0500
Received: from seagull.doc.ic.ac.uk ([] ident=root)
	by diver.doc.ic.ac.uk with esmtp (Exim 3.16 #7)
	id 15aPe2-0003NC-00
	for Axel.Boldt@obscured1.metrostate.edu; Fri, 24 Aug 2001 23:41:42 +0100
Received: (from dbh@localhost)
	by seagull.doc.ic.ac.uk (8.9.3/8.8.8) id XAA18948;
	Fri, 24 Aug 2001 23:41:39 +0100
Date: Fri, 24 Aug 2001 23:41:39 +0100
Message-Id: <200108242241.XAA18948@seagull.doc.ic.ac.uk>
X-Authentication-Warning: seagull.doc.ic.ac.uk: dbh set sender to dbh@obscured2.doc.ic.ac.uk using -f
From: Denis Howe <dbh@obscured3.doc.ic.ac.uk>
To: Axel Boldt <Axel.Boldt@obscured4.metrostate.edu>
In-reply-to: <200108211851.TAA27377@seagull.doc.ic.ac.uk> (message from Axel
	Boldt on Tue, 21 Aug 2001 19:51:21 +0100)
Subject: Re: Incorporate Foldoc content into Wikipedia?
References:  <200108211851.TAA27377@seagull.doc.ic.ac.uk>

> your requirement of presenting your copyright notice with every
> entry would cause trouble.  Would it be possible to get a version of

Your question has thrown me into a quandary.  I had not seen Wikipedia
before.  It is so close in spirit and function to the new FOLDOC
software I am working on that I am wondering whether I should continue
with FOLDOC at all or whether I shouldn't just redirect all effort to
Wikipedia.  Can you think of any reason to keep it seperate?

In the short term, I am more than happy for you to add FOLDOC's
content to Wikipedia and hereby release it under GNU FDL.

Denis Howe <dbh@obscured5.doc.ic.ac.uk>
Free On-Line Dictionary of Computing

HomePage | Public Domain Resources | Recent Changes | Preferences
This page is read-only | View other revisions
Last edited August 29, 2001 3:36 am by AxelBoldt (diff)