Classify external standards documents as "content", not "documentation"
The package perl-Data-Ical loosely speaking implements aspects of RFC 2445. The package includes a copy of RFC 2445 as the sole file in the doc/ directory. As I believe is typically true of IETF RFCs, the license of the RFC document permits essentially unrestricted distribution but constrains modification to a degree inconsistent with FOSS standards.
Fedora licensing policy has traditionally distinguished between documentation and content. Documentation licenses must be libre (ignoring a few special historical cases), while content licenses can prohibit modification. I propose adopting the policy that external standards documents should be considered "content", not "documentation", even if the package in question is an implementation of the standard, and even if the upstream project itself appeared to conceptualize the document as documentation (as may be the case with perl-Data-Ical). If adopted, this should be clarified in Fedora Legal Documentation in the "License Approval" module.
This is not inconsistent with the policy that man pages associated with a given package are documentation, not content, even if the man page is derived from an external standards document. See: #22 (closed)