[theme-reviewers] Minified CSS

[Chip Bennett]

We're talking about removing whitespace, not obfuscating (e.g.
base64-encoding) code. Removing whitespace is NOT "obfuscation". That
suggestion is ludicrous.

Let us be quite clear on what we're discussing here.

This is "WP CSS Coding Standard compliant" CSS:

#selector-1,
#selector-2,
#selector-3 {
    background: #fff;
    color: #000;
}

And this is the "minified" version of that same CSS:

#selector-1, #selector-2, #selector-3 { background: #fff; color: #000; }

Both are equally valid under the GPL. There is no GPL-compliance issue here,
period.

Chip

On Fri, Feb 18, 2011 at 8:26 AM, Austin Matzko <austin at pressedcode.com>wrote:

> On Fri, Feb 18, 2011 at 8:03 AM, Chip Bennett <chip at chipbennett.net>
> wrote:
> > Come now, let us be reasonable.
> > The GPL requirement to provide code in the "preferred form of work for
> > making modifications" regards file formats, not the quality of the
> written
> > code. "Human readable" != "human parsable". The former is a function of
> the
> > data format; the latter is a function of the developer's coding ability
> and
> > adherence to standards. The GPL is concerned with the former, not the
> > latter.
>
> Your interpretation does not match up with that of the Free Software
> Foundation, the authors of the GPL (and "principal organizational
> sponsor of the GNU Operating System"), who write, "Therefore,
> accessibility of source code is a necessary condition for free
> software. Obfuscated “source code” is not real source code and does
> not count as source code."
>
> <http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html>
>
> > Both the "minified" (style.css) and "WP CSS Coding Standards compliant"
> > (style.full.css) versions of the file are type text/CSS; thus, both are
> > *exactly the same format*. The "preferred form of work for making
> > modifications" to CSS files is text/css. Thus, as far as the GPL is
> > concerned, both meet this criterion.
>
> Obfuscated code doesn't count as source, no matter the file type.
> That's why, for example, you can't claim obfuscated PHP or JavaScript
> files as source, even in a PHP text file (as opposed to an
> executable).
>
> For further reference, here's another prominent GPL project that
> spells out exactly what CSS source means:
> <http://drupal.org/licensing/faq/>
>
> "The GPL requires that I distribute the "source code" of my files.
> What does that mean for a web application?
> ...
> "For CSS code, the CSS file itself, without any compression or
> obfuscation, is its own source code."
> _______________________________________________
> theme-reviewers mailing list
> theme-reviewers at lists.wordpress.org
> http://lists.wordpress.org/mailman/listinfo/theme-reviewers
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.wordpress.org/pipermail/theme-reviewers/attachments/20110218/80e3bee6/attachment.htm>