- From: Philippe Le Hegaret <plh@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 17 Feb 2010 13:57:14 -0500
- To: Robin Berjon <robin@berjon.com>
- Cc: spec-prod@w3.org, Doug Schepers <schepers@w3.org>
On Wed, 2010-02-17 at 13:51 -0500, Doug Schepers wrote: > Hi, Robin- > > Those are questions for PLH, now CCed. > > Robin Berjon wrote (on 2/17/10 8:55 AM): > > On Feb 17, 2010, at 04:07 , Doug Schepers wrote: > >> Philippe Le Hégaret has just updated the W3C Guide to suggest > >> licensing wording for specifications that include APIs or > >> bindings: > >> > >> http://www.w3.org/Guide/binding-license.html > >> > >> This may be useful for editors who use include language bindings > >> directly in the body of specifications. For convenience, you may > >> still wish to provide the raw bindings in a separate file, but it > >> makes sense to have the bindings in the document be under the same > >> reusable license (rather than the more restrictive document > >> license). > > > > The solution that the DOM uses relies on placing specific text in an > > external document. If we were to use similar text inside a > > single-page specification are there guidelines as to where we ought > > to place it? SotD? Alongside the © notice? Robin, the license is inside the W3C Recommendation itself. See http://www.w3.org/TR/DOM-Level-3-Core/copyright-notice.html for an example. In DOM specs, we copied the licenses. It may be possible to avoid doing so and just having the open paragraph. I'll update my document to link to the example, Philippe
Received on Wednesday, 17 February 2010 18:57:16 UTC