W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-qa@w3.org > April 2003

Re: OpsGL CP5.3 & "TM License"

From: Joseph Reagle <reagle@w3.org>
Date: Wed, 30 Apr 2003 19:23:14 -0400
To: Lofton Henderson <lofton@rockynet.com>
Cc: www-qa@w3.org
Message-Id: <200304301923.14389.reagle@w3.org>

On Wednesday 30 April 2003 14:43, you wrote:
> Because of the nature of the issue and the interests of the stakeholders,
> this issue needs to be moved to a larger, W3C-wide forum.

While I'm happy with the proposals below I do want to caution that I don't 
think this is on the agenda of some other, wider forum. It could happen, 
and I think we should apprise the Chairs, at least, of the QA WG 
resolution, but I don't want to set an expectation that work is actively 
beginning elsewhere. 

> Discussion. Unless exempted by custom submission terms with W3C
> Director's approval, a WG's submission license policies will necessarily
> conform to standard W3C policies for submitted materials, and
> specifically those procedures and terms defined in Contribution of
> Software or Test Materials to W3C [CONTRIB].

Sounds good.

> Currently approved W3C licenses that may be applied to test materials are
> the Document License and the Software License. The Document license has
> the characteristic of prohibiting modification of the Test Materials by
> licensees. This can be a highly desirable attribute for the protection of
> the integrity of test materials.  However, there are situations in which
> it is unworkable -- for example, there are Test Materials that require
> modification or completion in order to apply them.

Perhaps "inappropriate" is better than "unworkable"?

> Test Materials may contain any of these three of these components:  test
> software, test documentation, and test cases.  It is possible and
> sometimes desirable that the WG apply different licenses to different
> components.

Good.

> "Recommend to use Document License if it will work, Software License if
> not; may use different ones for test documentation, test cases, and test
> software; consult with W3C Legal if neither Software nor Document works
> for you."

Ok.


> Open Detail
> =====
>
> What to do with the last paragraph of current CP5.3 text:
>
> "Documented examples of TM submission licenses can be seen in the XML
> Schema submission license, and in the XML Protocol submission license."

As above, please just state, "The standard grant by which test suites, or 
other software, can be contributed to the W3C is [1].

[1] http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Legal/2002/contribution-grant-20021231
"

> This does not resolve the additional comment in LC-72.10, that the
> removal of "use" from the Document License prevents W3C member companies
> from using any TM that carry the Document License.  W3C Legal claims that
> is not the case.  This disagreement needs to be resolved between W3C
> Legal and members -- a consensus on whether or not the lack of an
> explicit 'Use' grant is actually a problem.

Agreed. I'm quite confident on this point, but if folks are still 
unconvinced I'm happy to continue the conversation with them.
Received on Wednesday, 30 April 2003 19:23:17 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Sunday, 6 December 2009 12:13:59 GMT