free-doc.html - en to zh_TW translation catalogue (21 entries)

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: The biggest deficiency in free operating systems is not in the software&mdash;it is the lack of good free manuals that we can include in these systems.  Many of our most important programs do not come with full manuals.  Documentation is an essential part of any software package; when an important free software package does not come with a free manual, that is a major gap.  We have many such gaps today.
zh_TW: 自由作業系統中最大的缺陷不在軟體上，而在於缺少可以收錄在這些系統中的優秀自由手冊。我們有許多重要程式都沒有附帶完整的手冊。文件可是任何軟體包中必要的組成元件；當重要的自由軟體包中沒有隨附自由手冊時，就會是很大的空白。而現在，我們就有很多這樣的空白。

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: Once upon a time, many years ago, I thought I would learn Perl.  I got a copy of a free manual, but I found it hard to read.  When I asked Perl users about alternatives, they told me that there were better introductory manuals&mdash;but those were not free (not freedom-respecting).
zh_TW: 很久很久以前，我想過要學 Perl，所以找來了一份自由手冊的副本，但發現很難讀。而當我向 Perl 群組詢問其他方案時，他們告訴我雖然有更好的入門手冊，但授權並不自由（不尊重自由）。

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: Why was this? The authors of the good manuals had written them for O'Reilly Associates, which published them with restrictive terms&mdash;no copying, no modification, source files not available&mdash;which made them nonfree, thus excluded them from the Free World.
zh_TW: 這是為什麼？那些好讀手冊的作者，為歐萊禮出版社編寫文章，並以限制性的授權條款出版：不可複製、不能修改、也不提供原始檔，導致這些手冊不自由，所以被排除在自由世界之外。

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: That wasn't the first time this sort of thing has happened, and (to our community's great loss) it was far from the last.  Proprietary manual publishers have enticed a great many authors to restrict their manuals since then.  Many times I have heard a GNU user eagerly tell me about a manual that he is writing, with which he expects to help the GNU Project&mdash;and then had my hopes dashed, as he proceeded to explain that he had signed a contract with a publisher that would restrict it so that we cannot use it.
zh_TW: 這不是第一次發生這種事，（對我們社群的巨大損失來說）也不會是最後一次。從那段時期開始，發行專有手冊的出版社吸引了許許多多作者以授權限制他們所編寫的手冊。有好多次，我聽到一些 GNU 使用者告訴我，他正在編寫手冊來幫助 GNU 專案，然後我的希望總在不久後破滅，因為他接著跟我說，他已經和出版社簽訂了合約，而合約會限制那份手冊，因此我們社群無法自由運用。

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: Given that writing good English is a rare skill among programmers, we can ill afford to lose manuals this way.
zh_TW: 有鑑於以流暢英文撰寫手冊的能力，對程式設計師族群來說極為罕見，所以因授權而失去可自由運用的手冊是我們難以負擔的。

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: The criterion for a free manual is pretty much the same as for free software: it is a matter of giving all users certain freedoms.  Redistribution (including commercial redistribution) must be permitted, so that the manual can accompany every copy of the program, on line or on paper.  Permission for modification is crucial too.
zh_TW: 判斷自由手冊的標準與自由軟體大致相同：確認文件是能否給予所有使用者特定的自由權利。授權條款必須允許文件能再次散布（包含商業再散布），如此才能讓手冊伴隨程式的每份副本提供，無論是以線上提供或印到紙上皆然。允許修改的權利也很重要。

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: As a general rule, I don't believe that it is essential for people to have permission to modify all sorts of articles and books.  The issues for writings are not necessarily the same as those for software.  For example, I don't think you or I are obliged to give permission to modify articles like this one, which describe our actions and our views.
zh_TW: 一般而言，我認為人們沒有必要擁有修改所有類型文章與書籍的權利。書面著作會遇到的問題不見得與軟體相同。舉例來說，我認為不管是你，或是我，都無權修改如本文這類描述作者經歷與觀點的文章。

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: But there is a particular reason why the freedom to modify is crucial for documentation for free software.  When people exercise their right to modify the software, and add or change its features, if they are conscientious they will change the manual too&mdash;so they can provide accurate and usable documentation with the modified program.  A manual which forbids programmers from being conscientious and finishing the job, or more precisely requires them to write a new manual from scratch if they change the program, does not fill our community's needs.
zh_TW: 但是有個特殊的原因，能說明為什麼可以自由修改自由軟體的文件相當重要。當人們行使了修改軟體的權利，新增或修改部份功能時，如果他們做事夠認真，那他們也會一併修改手冊——如此才可以為修改後的程式提供準確可靠的文件。一份禁止程式設計師認真完成他們工作的手冊，或者更精確來說，一旦他們修改了程式，就得重新編寫一本新的手冊，並不能滿足我們社群的需求。

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: While a blanket prohibition on modification is unacceptable, some kinds of limits on the method of modification pose no problem.  For example, requirements to preserve the original author's copyright notice, the distribution terms, or the list of authors, are OK.  It is also no problem to require modified versions to include notice that they were modified, even to have entire sections that may not be deleted or changed, as long as these sections deal with nontechnical topics.  (Some GNU manuals have them.)
zh_TW: 令人無法接受的是全面禁止修改；而也有不會造成問題的做法，像是對修改方法加上某些限制。例如，要求保留原作者的著作權聲明、散布條款、作者名單……等資訊，這都不是問題。還有，要求修改後版本附上聲明表示是修改過的版本，或是要求某些與技術無關的部份內容，整段不能刪除或修改也是可以的（有些 GNU 手冊就包含這類條款）。

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: These kinds of restrictions are not a problem because, as a practical matter, they don't stop the conscientious programmer from adapting the manual to fit the modified program.  In other words, they don't block the free software community from making full use of the manual.
zh_TW: 這類限制不是問題，因為不會阻礙盡責的程式設計師修改手冊以配合修改後的程式。換句話說，這不會妨礙自由軟體社群充份利用該手冊。

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: However, it must be possible to modify all the <em>technical</em> content of the manual, and then distribute the result through all the usual media, through all the usual channels; otherwise, the restrictions do block the community, the manual is not free, and so we need another manual.
zh_TW: 但是，手冊中所有的 <em>技術</em> 內容都必須可以修改，並且可以透過所有常用媒體，以及所有常見管道散布修改成果。否則，這樣的限制就會妨礙社群，讓手冊不再自由，而我們就得要再重寫另一份手冊。

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: Unfortunately, it is often hard to find someone to write another manual when a proprietary manual exists.  The obstacle is that many users think that a proprietary manual is good enough&mdash;so they don't see the need to write a free manual.  They do not see that the free operating system has a gap that needs filling.
zh_TW: 不幸的是，每當有專有手冊出現的時候，就很難再找到人去寫另外一本替補的自由手冊了。障礙的主因是很多使用者認為，專有手冊的品質已經夠好了，所以沒有必要再寫另一份自由手冊。他們沒看到自由作業系統這一塊需要填補的空白。

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: Why do users think that proprietary manuals are good enough? Some have not considered the issue.  I hope this article will do something to change that.
zh_TW: 為什麼使用者覺得專有手冊已經夠好了呢？有些人可從沒想過這個問題，而我希望這篇文章可以發揮作用改變現狀。

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: Other users consider proprietary manuals acceptable for the same reason so many people consider proprietary software acceptable: they judge in purely practical terms, not using freedom as a criterion.  These people are entitled to their opinions, but since those opinions spring from values which do not include freedom, they are no guide for those of us who do value freedom.
zh_TW: 至於其他使用者則認為，專有手冊是可以接受的，原因與許多人認為專有軟體是可以接受的理由相同：他們純粹只看實用與否，而不是以自由為評判標準。這些人有權表達他們的觀點，但這些觀點源於缺乏自由的價值觀，因此對於我們這些非常重視自由的人來說，這些意見並不值得參考。

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: Please spread the word about this issue.  We continue to lose manuals to proprietary publishing.  If we spread the word that proprietary manuals are not sufficient, perhaps the next person who wants to help GNU by writing documentation will realize, before it is too late, that he must above all make it free.
zh_TW: 請告訴社會大眾這個議題：我們正因專有授權的出版品而失去自由的手冊。如果我們將專有手冊的缺憾之處傳遍全世界，也許下一位想要編寫文件協助 GNU 的人，就能及早明瞭讓手冊自由的重要性。

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: We can also encourage commercial publishers to sell free, copylefted manuals instead of proprietary ones.  One way you can help this is to check the distribution terms of a manual before you buy it, and prefer copylefted manuals to noncopylefted ones.
zh_TW: 我們也可以多鼓勵商業出版社銷售自由、採用著作傳式授權的手冊，取代專有手冊。有個你可以幫上忙的方法，就是在購買手冊之前，先確認它的授權條款，並優先考慮以著作傳保護自由的手冊。

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: [Note: We maintain a <a href="/doc/other-free-books.html">page that lists free books available from other publishers</a>].
zh_TW: [注意：我們有維護一份<a href="/doc/other-free-books.html">其他出版社發行的自由書籍書單</a>]

note: type: Content of: <div><div><p>
en: Please send general FSF &amp; GNU inquiries to <a href="mailto:gnu@gnu.org">&lt;gnu@gnu.org&gt;</a>.  There are also <a href="/contact/">other ways to contact</a> the FSF.  Broken links and other corrections or suggestions can be sent to <a href="mailto:webmasters@gnu.org">&lt;webmasters@gnu.org&gt;</a>.
zh_TW: 請來信到 <a href="mailto:gnu@gnu.org">&lt;gnu@gnu.org&gt;</a> 詢問有關自由軟體基金會（FSF）和 GNU 的一般問題；或者<a href="/contact/">以其他方式</a>聯絡自由軟體基金會。至於損毀的連結及其他修正和建議，可以將之寄給 <a href="mailto:webmasters@gnu.org">&lt;webmasters@gnu.org&gt;</a>。

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: This page is licensed under a <a rel="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/4.0/">Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License</a>.
zh_TW: 本頁面採用<a rel="license" href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/4.0/deed.zh_TW">創用 CC 姓名標示-禁止改作 4.0 國際</a>條款給予授權。

note: TRANSLATORS: Use space (SPC) as msgstr if you don't want credits. type: Content of: <div><div>
en: *GNUN-SLOT: TRANSLATOR'S CREDITS*
zh_TW: <b>翻譯</b>：黃柏諺 <a href="mailto:s8321414 (at) gmail (dot) com">&lt;s8321414 (at) gmail (dot) com&gt;</a>, 2018.
    <b>校對</b>：曾政嘉 <a href="mailto:zerngjia (at) gmail (dot) com">&lt;zerngjia (at) gmail (dot) com&gt;</a>, 2018.

note: timestamp start type: Content of: <div><p>
en: Updated:
zh_TW: 更新時間︰
