[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
www/server/standards gnu-website-guidelines.html
|
From: |
Dora Scilipoti |
|
Subject: |
www/server/standards gnu-website-guidelines.html |
|
Date: |
Sun, 17 Mar 2024 03:51:53 -0400 (EDT) |
CVSROOT: /web/www
Module name: www
Changes by: Dora Scilipoti <dora> 24/03/17 03:51:53
Modified files:
server/standards: gnu-website-guidelines.html
Log message:
Update linking policies to refer to GotHub and other solutions to
avoidwebsites that require JavaScript such as GitHub (www-discuss March 11,
2024).
CVSWeb URLs:
http://web.cvs.savannah.gnu.org/viewcvs/www/server/standards/gnu-website-guidelines.html?cvsroot=www&r1=1.52&r2=1.53
Patches:
Index: gnu-website-guidelines.html
===================================================================
RCS file: /web/www/www/server/standards/gnu-website-guidelines.html,v
retrieving revision 1.52
retrieving revision 1.53
diff -u -b -r1.52 -r1.53
--- gnu-website-guidelines.html 11 Mar 2024 10:36:07 -0000 1.52
+++ gnu-website-guidelines.html 17 Mar 2024 07:51:53 -0000 1.53
@@ -560,21 +560,21 @@
are interested in.</li>
</ul>
-
<h3 id="pollinking" class="subheader">Appendix 1 - Linking Policies</h3>
-
-<p>One of the most complex aspects of maintaining web pages is following the
-linking guidelines; however, it's also a very crucial aspect of the job.</p>
-
-<p>We strive to ensure that all pages we promote—all pages which are
given
-links on our site—are friendly to the free software movement. Some
-pages will obviously not meet such standards; if the site flames the Free
-Software Foundation, or has no apparent relation to free software and
-surrounding issues, the link shouldn't be made. Beyond that, however,
-there are criteria used in determining whether or not it is appropriate to
-provide a link to a page from ours. They are listed below, in order of
-descending general importance.</p>
+<p>One of the most complex aspects of maintaining web pages is following
+the linking guidelines; however, it's also a very crucial aspect of the
+job.</p>
+
+<p>We strive to ensure that all pages we promote—all pages which
+are given links on our site—are friendly to the free software
+movement. Some pages will obviously not meet such standards; if the
+site flames the Free Software Foundation and/or the GNU Project, or has
+no apparent relation to free software and surrounding issues, the link
+shouldn't be made. Beyond that, however, there are criteria used in
+determining whether or not it is appropriate to provide a link to a page
+from ours. They are listed below, in order of descending general
+importance.</p>
<dl>
<dt>What's the context of the link?</dt>
@@ -603,9 +603,9 @@
them otherwise. As such, we avoid offering such free advertising,
either directly on our site or indirectly through links.</p>
-<p>What's tricky about this criteria is the “promotion” point:
there's
-a difference between mentioning proprietary software and making a
-sales pitch for it. Indeed, the GNU Project website mentions
+<p>What's tricky about this criteria is the “promotion”
+point: there's a difference between mentioning proprietary software and
+making a sales pitch for it. Indeed, the GNU Project website mentions
proprietary software throughout, but never gives people the impression
that its use does not present ethical problems.</p>
@@ -623,21 +623,14 @@
there's a difference between “Windows” and
“Microsoft Windows XP Home Edition.”</p>
-<p>If the page requires <a href="/philosophy/javascript-trap.html">nonfree,
-nontrivial JavaScript</a> and has serious failures with
-JavaScript disabled, the link shouldn't be made. Similarly, if the page
-has embedded Flash that plays an important role, so that a person would
-be missing something important if the videos do not play, the link
-should not be made.</p>
-
<p>The subject of the reference will also play a role in determining
how problematic a reference is. If the software is already very
popular, it's unlikely that a basic mention of it will be news to
the reader. Some examples of proprietary software which are common
-enough to be considered “well-known” are major operating systems
-(Windows, Mac OS, Sun OS, HP-UX) and primary common applications
-such as Office, Internet Explorer, Photoshop, Acrobat Reader, and
-Flash.</p>
+enough to be considered “well-known” are major operating
+systems (Windows, Mac OS, Sun OS, HP-UX) and primary common applications
+such as Office, Internet Explorer, Chrome, Photoshop, Acrobat Reader,
+and Flash.</p>
<p>GNU software project pages feel the full force of this policy.
Proprietary software should only be mentioned when the GNU software
@@ -645,14 +638,15 @@
well-known proprietary software. For example, the following
text—and not much else—would be acceptable:</p>
-<blockquote><p>w3 is a web browser for GNU Emacs, similar to Internet Explorer.
-It can run on all platforms GNU Emacs runs on, including GNU/Linux,
-proprietary Unix systems, and Windows.</p></blockquote>
+<p class="indent-para">w3 is a web browser for GNU Emacs, similar to
+Internet Explorer. It can run on all platforms GNU Emacs runs on,
+including GNU/Linux, proprietary Unix systems, and Windows.</p>
<p>Links which appear in other areas, such as the testimonials or
-philosophy pages, as well as links to user groups may discuss such
-software in greater detail, but links and other methods of
-encouragement to “learn more” should still be avoided.</p>
+philosophy pages, as well as links to user groups or third party
+organizations, may discuss such software in greater detail, but links
+and other methods of encouragement to “learn more” should
+still be avoided.</p>
</dd>
<dt>How does the page compare free software to open source?</dt>
@@ -662,17 +656,17 @@
least, treat free software and open source equally. Failure to do
so—whether it be by omitting free software or by implying that
open source is superior—is usually unacceptable. GNU software
-project pages should have little mention of open source. The GNOME
-page used to provide a good example of a tactful way to do it:</p>
+project pages should have little mention of open source. Here's an
+example of a tactful way to do it:</p>
-<blockquote><p>GNOME is part of the GNU Project, and is free software
(sometimes
-referred to as open source software).</p></blockquote>
+<p class="indent-para">XYZ is part of the GNU Project, and is free/libre
+software (sometimes referred to as open source software).</p>
-<p>Any exceptions to this rule should be apparent from the context.
-For instance, user groups pages may talk in greater detail about
-open source; we state on the user groups page, “As with our links
-page, the FSF is not responsible for the contents of other websites,
-or how up-to-date their information is.”</p>
+<p>Any exceptions to this rule should be apparent from the context. For
+instance, user group pages or pages of organizations listed in
+links.html may talk in greater detail about open source; we state on
+those pages, “The FSF is not responsible for the contents of other
+websites, or how up-to-date their information is.”</p>
</dd>
<dt>How does the page treat the GNU Project?</dt>
@@ -680,44 +674,138 @@
<dd>
<p>Pages which we link to should treat the GNU Project well. The
primary thing to look out for in this regard is whether the page
-calls the system GNU/Linux or just “Linux.” GNU software project
-and user group pages should almost never, if ever, fail to do this.
-Again, exceptions for other pages should be apparent from context.</p>
-
-<p>That said, certain parts of a page should not be considered against these
-criteria. For example, suppose we were to make a link to a page on a free
-software news site. Any advertisements or reader comments attached to the
-article would not be considered when determining whether it met or linking
-guidelines, since they're understood to be the opinion of their individual
-authors. Similarly, on user group pages, the contents of forums and wiki
-pages should not hold weight in these regards.</p>
-
-<p>Finally, some sites are understood to always have exception with most of
-these guidelines. These sites are usually about issues which are
-important, but somewhat peripheral, to the free software movement. Several
-times we have linked to the Electronic Frontier Foundation's site, even
-though they encourage the use of Flash and talked exclusively about open
-source software. It's generally understood that since these pages are not
-primarily about free software, the policies do not hold full force for
-them.</p>
+calls the system GNU/Linux or just “Linux.” GNU software
+projects and user group pages should almost never, if ever, fail to do
+this. Again, exceptions for other pages should be apparent from context.</p>
+
+<p>That said, certain parts of a page should not be considered against
+these criteria. For example, suppose we were to make a link to a page
+on a free software news site. Any advertisements or reader comments
+attached to the article would not be considered when determining whether
+it met our linking guidelines, since they're understood to be the
+opinion of their individual authors. Similarly, on user group or third
+party organization pages, the contents of forums and wiki pages should
+not hold weight in these regards.</p>
+
+<p>Finally, some sites are understood to always have exception with most
+of these guidelines. These sites are usually about issues which are
+important, but somewhat peripheral, to the free software movement.
+Several times we have linked to the Electronic Frontier Foundation's
+site, even though they encouraged the use of Flash, talked exclusively
+about open source software, and do not advocate users' freedom to
+redistribute and change software. It's generally understood that since
+these pages are not primarily about free software, the policies do not
+hold full force for them.</p>
<p>As a final explanation (coming from RMS):
Even for making links from www.gnu.org, we do not <em>require</em> that
people call the system GNU/Linux or use the term “free software”
-rather than “open source.” We do, however, require that they not
-promote any nonfree software.</p>
+rather than “open source.” We do, however, require that
+they not promote any nonfree software.</p>
-<p>If all this seems complicated, that's because, unfortunately, it is. Don't
-worry; a knack for it comes with time and experience. You may mis-evaluate
-a few pages as you're learning to get a feel for what's acceptable and what
-isn't; please don't hesitate to get a second opinion from a more
-experienced webmaster, or someone in charge like the Chief Webmaster or
-RMS. New exceptions will always come up; keep an open mind to that
-possibility and be ready to handle them properly.</p>
+<p>If all this seems complicated, that's because, unfortunately, it is.
+Don't worry; a knack for it comes with time and experience. You may
+mis-evaluate a few pages as you're learning to get a feel for what's
+acceptable and what isn't; please don't hesitate to get a second opinion
+from a more experienced webmaster, or someone in charge like the Chief
+Webmaster or RMS. New exceptions will always come up; keep an open mind
+to that possibility and be ready to handle them properly.</p>
+</dd>
+
+<dt id="javascript">Does the page work even if the user's browser
+refuses to run JavaScript code?</dt>
+
+<dd>
+<p>If the page requires <a href="/philosophy/javascript-trap.html">
+nonfree, nontrivial JavaScript</a> and has serious failures with
+JavaScript disabled, the link shouldn't be made. Similarly, if the page
+has embedded Flash that plays an important role, so that a person would
+be missing something important if the videos do not play, the link
+should not be made.</p>
+
+<p>In some cases, however, we can still refer to such pages and
+resources by using workarounds to bypass the JavaScript requirement.</p>
+
+<p id="gothub">One possibility is to use an instance of <a
+href="https://codeberg.org/gothub/gothub";>GotHub</a>—a free
+software frontend for GitHub that works without JavaScript—to
+replace links to pages and resources hosted at GitHub, a website that
+requires running nonfree JavaScript to be usable as intended.
+<!-- Add link to future article as follows: (See also
+<a href="/DIR/whats-wrong-with-github.html">What's Wrong with GitHub</a>.)-->
+</p>
+
+<p>Currently (March 2024), GotHub is not actively maintained and it
+lacks some functionalities. For example, it doesn't offer a way to
+browse repositories or download the source code without visiting the
+GitHub website, and it doesn't provide a git clone URL. Still, GotHub is
+helpful for some usages. For example, it works well for linking to
+individual files.</p>
+
+<p><strong>* Software packages</strong>. A useful file for software
+projects is the README file; it contains a description of the package,
+which is usually the first thing a user wants to see before attempting
+to fetch the repository. We have applied this solution several times in
+www.gnu.org; for example, we replaced this:<br />
+<span
class="bad"><code><del>https://github.com/pbatard/rufus</del></code></span> <br
/>
+with this: <br />
+<span
class="good"><code>https://gothub.frontendfriendly.xyz/pbatard/rufus/blob/master/README.md</code></span>.</p>
+
+<p>Another solution is to link directly to the tarball of a tagged
+commit on GitHub. The drawback of this method is that it is not very
+useful for tracking the project over time.</p>
+
+<p><strong>* Graphics, documents, manuals</strong>. These resources are
+sometimes hosted in user pages that do not require JavaScript to be
+fully usable, even when they are hosted inside an area of the GitHub
+website. In these cases, it is okay to link to such pages. For example,
+we replaced a link to <br />
+<span
class="bad"><code><del>https://github.com/foocorp/gnu-fm/blob/main/clients/meego/librefm/src/librefm-logo.png</del></code></span><br
/>
+with a link to <br />
+<span
class="good"><code>https://raw.githubusercontent.com/foocorp/gnu-fm/main/clients/meego/librefm/src/librefm-logo.png</code>
+</span>. <br />
+And we have links to documents such as <br />
+<span
class="good"><code>https://raw.githubusercontent.com/scootergrisen/licenser/master/gpl-3.0.da.txt</code></span>.
+</p>
+
+<p>Sometimes a resource may be hosted in more than one acceptable place.
+It can be a personal page in GitHub or somewhere else, or in some
+unrelated website. When evaluating which one to choose, consider factors
+such as: What's the status of the document? Is it a final version or is
+it likely to be modified anytime soon? Is the URL reliably stable, or
+is it likely to be moved?</p>
+
+<p>For example, in the past we had the case of a manual that was listed
+in other-free-books.html with this URL:<br />
+<span
class="bad"><code><del>https://github.com/davidam/orgguide-es</del></code></span>.<br
/>
+At the time, we had three possibilitites to replace that bad link: <br />
+1. GotHub<br />
+<span
class="good"><code>https://gothub.frontendfriendly.xyz/raw/davidam/davidam.github.io/master/docu/orgguide.es.pdf</code></span><br
/>
+2. Author's personal space at GitHub<br />
+<span
class="good"><code>https://raw.githubusercontent.com/davidam/davidam.github.io/master/docu/orgguide.es.pdf</code>
+</span><br />
+3. Publisher/Bookstore<br />
+<span
class="good"><code>https://traficantes.net/sites/default/files/pdfs/orgguide.es_.pdf</code></span><br
/>
+We decided for the third one, since it didn't seem that the manual was
+likely to be updated to a new version, and <cite>Traficantes de Sueños</cite>
+is an established, well-known publisher.</p>
+
+<p>Issue trackers on GitHub can be viewed and browsed without JavaScript,
+but active participation entails an account that can't be created without
+running nonfree JavaScript. It's okay to link to closed issues, like we
+did for <br />
+<span
class="good"><code>https://github.com/w3c/fingerprinting-guidance/issues/8</code></span>.
<br />
+Another possibility for closed issues is to link to the archived page at
+the Wayback Machine.</p>
+
+<p>Lastly, consider the possibility of talking to maintainers and
+authors to explain the problem. Hopefully they will move the repo
+somewhere else or post the material in a place we can link to.</p>
</dd>
</dl>
+
<h3 id="repo" class="subheader">Appendix 2 - Working with Web CVS
Repositories</h3>
@@ -1066,7 +1154,7 @@
<p class="unprintable">Updated:
<!-- timestamp start -->
-$Date: 2024/03/11 10:36:07 $
+$Date: 2024/03/17 07:51:53 $
<!-- timestamp end --></p>
</div>
</div><!-- for class="inner", starts in the banner include -->