W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > spec-prod@w3.org > October to December 2011

Re: CC license on figures in specs?

From: Ian Jacobs <ij@w3.org>
Date: Fri, 16 Dec 2011 08:00:51 -0600
Cc: spec-prod@w3.org
Message-Id: <12AA21B9-2981-415F-B5D2-490C95CA0911@w3.org>
To: "Anne van Kesteren" <annevk@opera.com>

On 16 Dec 2011, at 7:53 AM, Anne van Kesteren wrote:

> On Fri, 16 Dec 2011 14:45:38 +0100, Ian Jacobs <ij@w3.org> wrote:
>> On 16 Dec 2011, at 7:39 AM, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
>>> On Fri, 16 Dec 2011 14:11:39 +0100, Ian Jacobs <ij@w3.org> wrote:
>>>> I don't think that situation is stable; I do not expect that licensing approach is compatible.
>>> 
>>> Are you saying that what the HTML WG is doing is problematic?
>> 
>> I am talking about Editor's Drafts with different licenses. Is that what you are referring to?
> 
> Yes. The HTML WG publishes text based on http://svn.whatwg.org/ which uses a different license than what the HTML WG publishes on TR/.
> 
> We could also discuss the DOM if you prefer. Which is was initially developed at http://simon.html5.org/specs/web-dom-core and then developed at https://bitbucket.org/ms2ger/dom-core/ and now jointly with the W3C also at http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/domcore/ (because of Mercurial the repository can be shared).

I believe there is uncertainty about the DOM draft's license. 

Ian

> 
> 
> -- 
> Anne van Kesteren
> http://annevankesteren.nl/
> 
> 

--
Ian Jacobs (ij@w3.org)    http://www.w3.org/People/Jacobs/
Tel:                                      +1 718 260 9447
Received on Friday, 16 December 2011 14:00:58 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Saturday, 10 March 2012 06:19:18 GMT