- From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
- Date: Wed, 9 Mar 2011 09:49:40 +0000 (UTC)
- To: Doug Jones <doug_b_jones@me.com>
- Cc: Lawrence Rosen <lrosen@rosenlaw.com>, www-archive@w3.org
On Tue, 8 Mar 2011, Doug Jones wrote: > > My understanding from the above and the discussion to date for works not > associated with specific software, in a bulleted nutshell, is > > - Any work using information from the W3C HTML5 specification in bulk or > small amounts to describe software is OK, although not authorized. > > - Any work describing a change to how something in the W3C HTML5 > specification is to behave (like adding an attribute to an element) by > changing only that part of the wording and > > -- republishing the work as the W3C HTML5 *or* the HTML5 > specification is *not* permitted. > > -- publishing it as a separate document not claiming to be a > technical specification is OK, although not authorized. > > -- publishing it as a separate document *and* claiming to be a > technical specification and not including or implying 'HTML' or 'W3C' in > the title is OK, although not authorized. But all of the above except for using the W3C's trademarked name is already allowed anyway if one just uses the WHATWG copy instead of the W3C copy as the starting point (they are more or less identical except for the header), which is why I don't understand the W3C's insistance on trying to lock this down. http://whatwg.org/c Add to this Lawrence's opinion that none of this can be copyrighted in the first place and it becomes even less comprehensible. -- Ian Hickson U+1047E )\._.,--....,'``. fL http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,. Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Wednesday, 9 March 2011 10:07:30 UTC