W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-qa-wg@w3.org > November 2004

Re: Document License prohibits profiles?

From: Lynne Rosenthal <lynne.rosenthal@nist.gov>
Date: Thu, 04 Nov 2004 09:58:32 -0500
Message-Id: <6.0.0.22.2.20041104095725.01c59a58@wsxg03.nist.gov>
To: "Lofton Henderson" <lofton@rockynet.com>, Dominique HazaŽl-Massieux <dom@w3.org>
Cc: <www-qa-wg@w3.org>
I also think that this is a good question for the IG - can you send your 
original question to the IG list and see if that raises some 
interest/concerns.

lynne

At 09:49 AM 11/4/2004, Lofton Henderson wrote:

>At 09:05 AM 11/4/2004 +0100, Dominique HazaŽl-Massieux wrote:
> >Le jeu 04/11/2004 ŗ 00:18, Lofton Henderson a ťcrit :
> > > Is it legal for an individual or group to write a profile of a Rec which
> > > contains the Document License [1]?  That license says:
> >
> >FWIW, the right mailing list to ask this question is site-policy@w3.org
> >(non publicly archived).
>
>That may be the place to find the answer.  But the question is definitely
>relevant here, to our work.  We are investing a lot of energy into the
>topics areound "subdividing the specification".  Our ViS (supporting
>SpecGL) even recommends rules for profiles to support "derived profiles",
>e.g., by external groups.
>
>I will ask the question.  But I think QAWG should be prepared to take a
>position.
>
>-Lofton.
>
>
>
>
Received on Thursday, 4 November 2004 14:58:08 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 + w3c-0.30 : Thursday, 9 June 2005 12:13:18 GMT