- From: Dimitris Dimitriadis <dimitris.dimitriadis@improve.se>
- Date: Wed, 6 Jun 2001 19:30:35 +0200
- To: "'Mary Brady'" <mbrady@nist.gov>, Dimitris Dimitriadis <dimitris.dimitriadis@improve.se>, www-dom-ts@w3.org
comments inlined -----Ursprungligt meddelande----- Från: Mary Brady [mailto:mbrady@nist.gov] Skickat: den 6 juni 2001 19:31 Till: Dimitris Dimitriadis; www-dom-ts@w3.org Ämne: Re: Recap and action items comments inlined ----- Original Message ----- From: "Dimitris Dimitriadis" <dimitris.dimitriadis@improve.se> To: "'Mary Brady'" <mbrady@nist.gov>; <www-dom-ts@w3.org> Sent: Wednesday, June 06, 2001 12:55 PM Subject: SV: Recap and action items > comments inlined > > -----Ursprungligt meddelande----- > Från: Mary Brady [mailto:mbrady@nist.gov] > Skickat: den 6 juni 2001 17:19 > Till: www-dom-ts@w3.org > Ämne: Re: Recap and action items > > > > ----- 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. > > [dd] Of course everybody wants credit. That's why we'll include the author > name and organisation. After submission, however, the tests will belong to > the DOM TS framework. > [mb] Okay -- what happens when tests are submitted with a copyright? Or, do we not accept them unless we have free access to modify them? I am particularly concerned about a test that is submitted, accepted, and then someone later believes that there is a problem with the test -- modifies it, and resubmits it -- are we set up to track modifications? [dd] Very good point. resubmitted with a pointer to the old submission would be ebough, I think, as long as we, as Mary points out, track the submission steps. It's a service, if you will, we should provide. In any case, I think the process implies that the tests cannot contain copyright statements if they are to form part of the DOM TS. I suppose one way of going about would be to speak to the submitting party at that time. --Mary > --Mary > >
Received on Wednesday, 6 June 2001 13:31:08 UTC