W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-css-testsuite@w3.org > January 2008

RE: Licensing

From: Alex Mogilevsky <alexmog@exchange.microsoft.com>
Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2008 08:48:07 -0800
To: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>, Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>
CC: "public-css-testsuite@w3.org" <public-css-testsuite@w3.org>
Message-ID: <04F36FB4ED0F85459AA447F72711526F0125438156DE@DF-GRTDANE-MSG.exchange.corp.microsoft.com>

Well, it doesn't sound like HTML test suite is easy to take as a model then. It sounds like the interested parties should come up with a proposal. That may work better than a threat...

At the same time, as Bert mentioned, current license does allow republishing tests with permission, and I don't see any evidence that such permission was ever denied.

At this point I am going to leave this thread. I don't have any vested interest in resolution one way or another...

-----Original Message-----
From: Dan Connolly [mailto:connolly@w3.org]
Sent: Monday, January 14, 2008 2:35 PM

Let's see... no, I guess that's the most clear record:

"<fantasai> Anne wants a W3C lawyer to attend to discuss licensing

<fantasai> DanC says that MIT has been approved"
 -- http://www.w3.org/2007/11/09-html-wg-minutes.html

Is something more formal wanted or needed?

I got approval to contribute my own work under the MIT license,
and as far as I know, it's OK for the HTML WG as a whole
to use the MIT license.

As to an announcement on behalf of the HTML WG... the HTML WG
hasn't made any test suite licensing decisions. I think
the people interested in test suite development can work
for some time without any formal decision from the HTML WG.
If you think a formal decision is important, please let me know.
Received on Tuesday, 15 January 2008 16:48:23 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 20 September 2010 17:51:55 GMT