W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-dwbp-comments@w3.org > April 2016

Re: Licence vs. license

From: Annette Greiner <amgreiner@lbl.gov>
Date: Wed, 13 Apr 2016 11:55:32 -0700
To: public-dwbp-comments@w3.org
Message-ID: <570E9624.4030002@lbl.gov>
Personally, I'm fine with following the British approach or the American 
approach, but I suspect W3C has its own rule so that things are 
consistent across specs. Searching w3.org for an answer, I don't see a 
statement, but things seem to be written in American English. I find far 
more instances of "color" than "colour", and I see that the document 
license [1] uses the sentence " This version licenses Code Components 
under the W3C Software License 
<http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Legal/copyright-software>." I found that 
the HTML WG dealt with this in 2009 and the editor said they were 
supposed to be following American English [2].

[1] https://www.w3.org/Consortium/Legal/2015/doc-license
[2] https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=6763

On 4/12/16 2:44 PM, Lewis S Robinson wrote:
> In response to Renato,
>
> it may, or may not be the case that the English have played a language 
> game on Americans, you have not noticed, and it has led to a great 
> deal of confusion..
>
> Kindly consider the definitions  that pop up on google.uk 
> <http://google.uk> when the following URIs are entered
> --
> https://www.google.co.uk/#q=licence
> --
> https://www.google.co.uk/#q=license
>
> You see, in my humble opinion, and as far as I can understand, there 
> is a fundamental and pivotal difference between someone who grants a 
> licence, and the person who is then in possession of a license.
>
> Lewis.

-- 
Annette Greiner
NERSC Data and Analytics Services
Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory
Received on Wednesday, 13 April 2016 18:55:52 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 13 April 2016 18:55:52 UTC