- 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>
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 UTC