Maryetta Campbell wrote:
Jay Litwyn wrote:
Nothing like getting a 6.19 KB (6,340 bytes) email message with no BODY text included, just a SUBJECT line. And on top of that, having it with a Content-Type of "multipart/mixed" so that we can have both HTML and TEXT copies of nothing. :-) ;-}
Okay...uh...so I sent plain text in (which is my default), and somehow ended up replying to multipart/mixed in my own thread by default, that is for not reasserting plain text. Maybe I will figure out whether it is a feature of the list before I complain to Micro$oft.
As to the Subject's question, I would say that it is not a matter of hiding from FractInt, but hiding from the everyday User. Some formula authors did not wish that others had access to all of their creations. In fact, the prolific Dr. Robert W. Carr was one of those (even though Erik Nathan Reckless purposefully distributed those formula to UF users against Mr. Carr's wishes).
See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/creative_commons_licenses for an overview. I look at it this way: If you do not want your stuff used, then say so explicitly, or do not release it in the first place. The creative-commons stipulation I seldom use is ShareAlike [SA]. I do not think you can keep people from sharing USENET posts along with their own comments, for instance, so I do not think SA goes on USENET (mailing lists, basically, and more convenient, because they are categorized, and they do not go to your INBOX). I've seen "copyright intact" ignored to the revealing detriment of joke authors who try to turn sensible jokes into racism. I think the laissez-faire, sorta-common view is that formulas are more open than parameters, although it is possible to write formulas with parameters embedded; with no parameters. I decline to write parameter-free formulas; makes me feel more secure in my claim on parameters. To be safe in such a case, it would be "CC-BY-NC-ND; released to illustrate my text; please ask me whether your variations are acceptable for release" -- on the formula. CC-BY-NC-ND is pretty much the same as "all rights reserved", so it is accurate to omit CC, which is supposed to mean copyleft, not copyright. More details about what such things apply to are at creative commons organizations, who also spell out and discuss enforcability in your land. It is like you can't dictate honesty, though, so if you do not want to make applications to individuals, publishers, authorities or lawyers (in order of preference), then keep it to yourself. I am pretty sure that a lot of people do not need to be told that. So, now I know that "frm:" is probably a bug in FRACTINT that someone took as a feature. At least it still looks like a bug to me, and someone probably lobbied for it to stay. It goes towards "Data Rights Management" stuff in Windows: towards legalistic pain involved in trying to force people into using their own brains for all of their material, when so much of it on the internet seems free; just gotta know how to sell. _______ http://ecn.ab.ca/~brewhaha/ BrewJay's Babble Bin The first feature of jeenyus is knowing what can be borrowed or bought without being taken or caught.