Re: [Fsfe-uk] AFFS web site

[Jason Clifford]

On Thu, 1 May 2003, Andrew Savory wrote:

> So do I. I'd like us to be consistent with the rest of the world in how we
> write and speak our language, that is, we start counting at one.
> 
> > I would prefer, for example, that people reply to the DTi consultation
> > on "OSS" as a default exploitation route for publically funded software
> > than argue here about whether to start numbering schemes from 0 or 1 :)
> 
> This is my 'AFFS day' so I'll get to that, but I'd be embarrassed to refer
> the DTi to the AFFS web site, if we can't even get a little thing like
> counting done properly.

I've just checked the specifics of how the FSF definition is written and I 
really don't see the problem. The numeric references are not presented as 
a index - if they were I would agree with you.

Perhaps if the list were presented as a numbered index it might address 
your concerns like so:

1. The freedom to run the program, for any purpose (freedom 0)
2. The freedom to study how the program works, and adapt it to your needs 
(freedom 1)
etc.

Optionally the bracketed numbers could be specifically listed as "GNU 
freedom 0", etc. Would that be a solution that would work for people?

Jason Clifford
-- 
UKFSN.ORG               Finance Free Software while you surf the 'net
http://www.ukfsn.org/                   Sign up now