- From: Eve L. Maler <elm@arbortext.com>
- Date: Fri, 02 Apr 1999 12:53:19 -0500
- To: spec-prod@w3.org
- Cc: elm@arbortext.com
Paul Grosso sent me an XMLspec comment in private correspondence this week, and it started what we thought was an interesting discussion. The issue was whether a copyright element should be added to the DTD, so that a copyright statement could be supplied in fairly "cooked" form so that it would appear in the various outputs. I suggested that a stylesheet might be able to output the copyright statement, if it were pretty much boilerplate. Paul then asked (I copy with his permission): >Is a document properly copyrighted if the copyright is only >in it stylesheet? > >I post .xml and .htm files for the XML Fragment spec. Is >the .xml file on the public W3C server properly copyrighted >if the copyright statement is only in the .fos file on my >laptop? > >I think I better re-instate my request for a copyright block. > >Currently, I'm putting the copyright info in the ultimate >paragraph of the status section, but it would be nice to >have a real block for it, and I don't think removing the >copyright from the .xml file entirely is a good idea. I responded: >This is an issue that I've dealt with with several customers, and it also >came up in the old OSF thing. Sometimes it's not just copyright >statements, but other legal-related statements too. Here are the options >as I see them (and they're not mutually exclusive): > >- Put copyright statements in the "source code" a la program code, usually >in comments. This protects the source. > >- Arrange to output copyright statements in the various outputs, thus >protecting each output. This can be done by each stylesheet, or by a >combination of source markup/content and markup (e.g. DocBook's Copyright >element, with Year and Holder subelements, with the c symbol being output >by the stylesheet), or by "pure" source markup/content that gets output >straightforwardly. > >Given that XML can function as both source and output, I could see having a >fairly transparent copyright block in there. However, it can never be >guaranteed that a stylesheet won't suppress, mangle, or reverse the meaning >of (!) source content... Does anyone have an opinion about what should happen in XMLspec, or have comments about this issue in general? Eve
Received on Friday, 2 April 1999 12:53:43 UTC