Xref: utzoo gnu.misc.discuss:1178 comp.sources.d:5537
Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!samsung!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!uflorida!mephisto!bbn.com
From: pplaceway@bbn.com (Paul Placeway)
Newsgroups: gnu.misc.discuss,comp.sources.d
Subject: Re: The Official Word on Citations in FSF Works
Message-ID: <58000@bbn.BBN.COM>
Date: 5 Jul 90 20:57:47 GMT
References: <9886@odin.corp.sgi.com>
Sender: news@bbn.com
Followup-To: gnu.misc.discuss
Lines: 23

Perhaps I wasn't entirly clear.  Oz said this quite well, but I'll try
to clearify my opinion a bit more:

If a piece of information was used either in the implimentation of a
program, or the documentation of that program, then said piece of
information should be given due credit, regardless of it's
availiablity status.

Since the GAWK Manual is the primary documention on the GAWK program,
that is where I would expect to see the credit placed.  Perhaps the
credit should be split into two sections (one for the program, one for
the documentation) or perhaps not.

So, if _The_AWK_Programming_Language_ was used in the *implimentation*
of the GAWK Program, then it should show up in the bibliography of the
GAWK Manual.

Perhaps this whole mess could be solved by having two seperate bib
sections: one for GNU and otherwise free information, the other for
Non-free information (books, journals, etc.).  Then both the
information trail and the status of each part would be clear.

		-- Paul Placeway <pplaceway@bbn.com>