Some more comments ..

GerardM gerard.meijssen at GMAIL.COM
Tue May 29 22:26:13 UTC 2007

For your information I read the digest and consequently it is not really
possible to answer easily to individual messages in there...

Valerie, you state that you would consider making SignWriting public
domain.. there are legal systems that do not allow for this to happen. I
also am really grateful that you state in no uncertain terms that you want
people to use SignWriting... REALLY want to have all people that sign also
write their language !!

PS I strongly believe that there is nothing you like better than more people
using SignWriting to write their sign language. The license should make it
even more obvious.. :)

Sandy, I am really happy that you are building your software in such a way
that re-use of the code is considered. At some stage I may want to learn
more about how you all manage the software development. This will certainly
be the case when we get to the stage when we enable MediaWiki for

SignWriting is well established and as a consequence it will be impossible
to patent it. However, a grant was given by the NSF and in the grant is says
that there is no method of writing sign languages. This implies that a lot
of marketing for SignWriting may be needed to prevent these notions on
official documents.

PS I do not get fed up with this stuff. It is not only essential to get it
right, it also has to feel right to all of you. This takes time.. and we do
not need to rush into anything. So I very much agree with Valerie that we
have to be relaxed about all this.. it is something that needs doing.. in a
way it is sad that it takes time away from other things.

Pharos, the IPA permission seems to be very much what might be considered
for SignWriting as well. It is short, it is clear and it does not have any
restrictions at all. This permission allows for the creation of specific
fonts (all having a similar look and feel) that can be created under
whatever license. In the end it is your choice .. consider it with care..

Jonathan, I suggested the OFL, I gladly have you all use a different
license. The license of the OFL is considered Free and it has all the
legalese worked out. That makes it relatively easy to adopt. Then again, the
IPA permission seems to be an equally valid choice that seems to be closer
to what you all want.

I do agree with Steve's analysis about the impact of the license.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <>

More information about the Sw-l mailing list