The only way I could figure out how to get different output for
monolithic and section-based versions was to do this rather odd hack,
which uses tex4ht.usr to conditionally insert specific bootstrap HTML
for the mention that will allow proper formatting.
Joshua Gay made contributions to all the files earlier in 2014 (see git
log) which were copyrighted by the FSF, so FSF's copyright needs
refreshed to include this year.
Denver recently added a section to the enforcement-case-studies.tex, so
his copyright notice needs to go there and at the top file.
I made changes to enforcement-case-studies.tex on top of Denver's.
Also, remove commented-out copyright notices -- the ones in the actual
text are now primary and should be maintained directly.
Without "fn-in" option, the footnotes each get their own page, which
seems silly.
This fixes that.
Also included are more rm files, so htlatex doesn't freak when it gets
run again after html files have been moved to public_html.
tex4ht supports "overlib" for footnote popups. The hack is pretty
straightforward; it dumps a Javascript area into a .js file that can
then be used by overlib to popup stuff.
This hack is to use that output to make the same thing work with jQuery
UI's tooltip widget.
Note that we run with overlib support first, then *without* it in the
Makefile setup. This is to force the needed .js file to be generated,
but make sure the HTML doesn't try to load overlib (which is default).
(This should be adapted as a patch to upstream tex4ht ultimately.)
Also included herein are improvements to the Makefile to build the HTML
output.
This change also fixes the location of the multiple image note, which
is better included after the note added in 3c15418 so that it's clear
what "This step" refers to.
Also added were notes on how we checked to confirm the kernel was
corresponding and commentary on why the toolchain issue was much less
severe than the toolchain issues we usually see.
Note that this chapter is not properly TeX-formatted. Some work will
need to be done to make it compile correctly. It should also be
generally expanded and made to flow more nicely, in the spirit of the
other case study chapters.
The older portions of this tutorial tended to favor the term "derivative
work", since that was the popular catch-all term used at the time the
text was written.
However, as the newer text regarding GPLv3 now states, FSF abandoned the
use of the term "derivative work" in the text of GPLv3 itself, for
various reasons we already discuss in the tutorial.
Therefore, the tutorial text itself should likely not rely so heavily on
the phrase "derivative work" throughout. This change herein reworks a
number of places where "derivative work" was used in the tutorial and
replaced it with other terms.
Ultimately, some word-smithing happened as part of the process of doing
this patch.
