- From: Mary Brady <mbrady@nist.gov>
- Date: Wed, 6 Jun 2001 11:18:32 -0400
- To: <www-dom-ts@w3.org>
----- Original Message ----- From: "Arnold, Curt" <Curt.Arnold@hyprotech.com> To: <www-dom-ts@w3.org> Sent: Wednesday, June 06, 2001 10:12 AM Subject: RE: Recap and action items > > A general question, though: How do we deal with the fact that the DOM > TS > > will be published under the W3C document license? Which IPR statement > is > it > > people will be presented with when they use the SF platform? > > > > > > [mb] It seems to me that since this is an official W3C activity, that at > least the > submittal of tests should be via a w3c.org address. Is there any way > that > W3C could run a copy of SharePoint as well? > > [ca] The SourceForge Project page will only say that the license is "Other". On the test submittal mockup, I used a placeholder for a statement of the test process IPR. That text could be anything > that you want it to be. Any download (.zip, etc) should have the full statement of IPR. Should each test have a "Copyright (c) 2001, MIT..." boilerplate? > > If you wanted to use a w3 address, you could just put a frameset on the W3C site that enclosed the sourceforge implementation. The SourceForge tracker is actually more closely aligned to what we want > to do and is open source, so it could be run on W3C hardware, but I think the framing approach is a lot more expedient. > > Sounds okay to me -- I think you're right -- we're better off leaving things on SourceForge. As a note, some of the XML tests did come in with copyrights attached to them. Most organizations are looking to get credit for their contributions. --Mary
Received on Wednesday, 6 June 2001 11:13:49 UTC