Add docs for mc-stan.org

[winni2k]

Feature request

I am adding this issue to let people know that I am starting work on importing documentation for mc-stan.org. I had previously proposed this documentation on the gitr channel and got positive feedback for the idea.

Summary

The mc-stan documentation is somewhat similar to the scikit-learn documentation, and it is split into several parts:

1. User's guide
2. Stan language reference
3. Stan functions reference
4. User guides for projects building on top of Stan
5. Case studies
6. Tutorials

I think points 1.-3. could be added to devdocs.io. I think point 3. is lowest hanging fruit, so I will start with that.

The documentation for 1-3 is located at https://github.com/stan-dev/docs

[winni2k]

The license for the documentation appears to be CC-BY-ND 4.0 https://github.com/stan-dev/docs/blob/master/LICENSE
That sounds like it might not be compatible with devdocs.io can someone weigh in on that?

[winni2k]

I have asked the Stan developers to change their license: https://discourse.mc-stan.org/t/mc-stan-documentation-license-precludes-easy-reuse/27507

[winni2k]

Sorry this got dropped for a while. I thought I was supposed to post everything in discord now, but I got no response there. Reposting here:

I discussed this issue with the mc-stan.org devs (https://discourse.mc-stan.org/t/mc-stan-documentation-license-precludes-easy-reuse/27507/14?u=winni2k) and they make these three points:

1. The community moderators say that they are primarily interested in prohibiting unfaithful reproductions of the documentation:

We didn’t intend to prevent people from reformatting the output. We wanted to stop people providing incomplete or badly modified doc for Stan. But we’re not lawyers and if you want more assurance, I’m afraid you’re going to have to talk to your own lawyers about what rights the CC BY-ND license grants. Sorry about that.

2. One moderator thinks that what devdocs does is compatible with the ND license as long as we only reformat:

Skimming the actual license it seems like section 2.a.4 says reformatting is totally fine?

Media and formats; technical modifications allowed. The Licensor authorizes You to exercise the Licensed Rights in all media and formats whether now known or hereafter created, and to make technical modifications necessary to do so. The Licensor waives and/or agrees not to assert any right or authority to forbid You from making technical modifications necessary to exercise the Licensed Rights, including technical modifications necessary to circumvent Effective Technological Measures. For purposes of this Public License, simply making modifications authorized by this Section 2(a)(4) 1 never produces Adapted Material.

From: https://discourse.mc-stan.org/t/mc-stan-documentation-license-precludes-easy-reuse/27507/9

3. The community is unable to make changes to the license because the licenses are held by the original contributors, and contacting all of them might be impossible now.

[winni2k]

Creative Commons thinks that translating to another language is clearly not allowed under the ND clause: https://creativecommons.org/2020/04/21/academic-publications-under-no-derivatives-licenses-is-misguided/

How much rewriting happens in the devdocs process? Is there any way that we can grab the html or markdown as-is and integrate them? I suppose it's probably a derivative work if we rewrite hyperlinks?

[winni2k]

I also found this, unfortunately as yet unanswered, question on Law SE: https://law.stackexchange.com/questions/45392/is-rendering-markdown-to-html-considered-an-adaptation-under-cc-by-sa-3-0

[winni2k]

I have had more of a read around the CC-BY-ND license, and I think what devdocs does could be considered reformatting, which is allowed under the license. The examples of reformatting are pretty broad, and even include printing a digital image on paper.

However, I am now concerned that the documentation itself may not be legal because it was created by around 50 people who edited each others' work, and I think that would not be allowed under the license in most legal jurisdictions. I have started a discussion with the community about this issue here: https://discourse.mc-stan.org/t/is-editing-the-mc-stan-documentation-legal-under-the-cc-by-nd-clause/30367/2

[winni2k]

I found this link on remixing cc licensed work: https://certificates.creativecommons.org/cccertedu/chapter/4-4-remixing-cc-licensed-work/

This tutorial introduces the concept of a collection of cc licensed works. Collections can be made up of cc-by-nd license works. I would consider devdocs a collection. So i think there is no problem with scraping cc-by-nd licensed works from that perspective.