W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > April 2011

Re: Draft HTML5 licensing survey

From: Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>
Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2011 06:19:34 -0400
Message-ID: <4DB69C36.2000502@intertwingly.net>
To: "L. David Baron" <dbaron@dbaron.org>
CC: Paul Cotton <Paul.Cotton@microsoft.com>, "public-html@w3.org" <public-html@w3.org>
On 04/25/2011 06:53 PM, L. David Baron wrote:
> On Monday 2011-04-25 20:39 +0000, Paul Cotton wrote:
>>> My substantive comment is that I feel like I either need an option that says:
>>> ( ) I can live with this option as long as the specification
>>>      continues to be published at whatwg.org under a more liberal
>>>      license; otherwise I cannot live with this license.
>>> or clearer instructions on whether responders should assume that simultaneous publication at the WHATWG will continue.
>> I believe the current survey (with radio buttons for each choice)
>> would permit you to select your response for a license and then to
>> provide any caveats in the Rationale field.  Does that meet your
>> needs?
> It does if it's clear which set of assumptions the survey is
> assuming, that is, whether I should assume continued whatwg
> publication when choosing the radio buttons and explain in the
> comments how I'd respond given the lack of continued whatwg
> publication, or the other way around.

Nobody is proposing anything whatsoever with respect to the WHATWG: 
neither proposing that that the WHATWG ceases immediately nor that it 
continues in perpetuity.  If it comforts you to know that substantially 
similar material is currently being made available by an organization 
without a patent policy, feel free to note that in your comments.

Does that meet your needs?

> -David

- Sam Ruby
Received on Tuesday, 26 April 2011 10:20:03 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Saturday, 9 October 2021 18:45:36 UTC