- From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
- Date: Sun, 04 Nov 2007 01:49:28 -0400
- To: Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@iki.fi>, ij@w3.org, karl@w3.org, chris@w3.org, Chris.Wilson@microsoft.com
- Cc: www-archive@w3.org, mike@w3.org, rigo@w3.org
Henri, I'm sorry I said "you have been warned" when we discussed the HTML spec license a few days ago... http://krijnhoetmer.nl/irc-logs/html-wg/20071024#l-430 <hsivonen> ChrisWilson: fwiw, when I copied bits of the spec to my code comments, I used the WHATWG copy of the spec in order to avoid any W3C document license issues. * DanC tunes back in... <DanC> hsivonen, on Rigo's behalf, I should note that you don't necessarily avoid W3C license issues by doing that; HTML 5 is, arguably, a derivative work of HTML 4, which is copyright W3C. * aroben__ has quit (Ping timeout) <hsivonen> DanC: I copied the tokenization section. IANAL, but I don't buy the notion that was a derivative work of HTML 4 in the copyright sense <DanC> well, you've been warned. <DanC> Rigo and Danny, who are laywers, convinced me. That was a poor choice of words. I should have said something like "well, I'm not sure either way." I went on to say... <DanC> hmm... I wonder if that's new information that motivates re-considering the 9 May decision. ugh. I'm not inclined to re-open the 9 May decision to start review of the HTML 5 draft, but now that I put the question on releasing the HTML 5 draft as a W3C WD, the answer from the W3C team should include any concerns we have about the copyright. -- Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
Received on Sunday, 4 November 2007 05:49:27 UTC