- From: Dimitris Dimitriadis <dimitris.dimitriadis@improve.se>
- Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2001 15:03:27 +0200
- To: "'Mary Brady'" <mbrady@nist.gov>, www-dom-ts@w3.org
comments inlined As a general point, however, I would for my own part really like to see that the copyright issues get resolved as we should work as a group. This is a unary initiative with contributions from various sources, but I was under the impression that we work towards common goals and waive rights to the material by donating it to the W3C for publication. I would gladly schedule a telephone conference to resolve this as soon as possible, especially since we are so close to finalizing the framework. -----Ursprungligt meddelande----- Från: Mary Brady [mailto:mbrady@nist.gov] Skickat: den 11 juni 2001 21:48 Till: www-dom-ts@w3.org Ämne: Re: Early XSLT's ----- Original Message ----- From: "Arnold, Curt" <Curt.Arnold@hyprotech.com> To: <mbrady@nist.gov> Sent: Monday, June 11, 2001 12:58 PM Subject: RE: Early XSLT's > I try to spend some time on the transforms tonight and put in into the xmlconf project with a GPL license and with a personal copyright. This will provide a fallback in case any official transform is > under the document license, then someone who wants to create a transform for a different language can base it on this work and not have to start from scratch. > [mb] I would prefer not to see additional efforts, rather for those who are interested in DOM testing to contribute to the W3C DOM WG effort. I'm sure we can work out a way that a generic transformation can be made available as a starting point for a particular language -- I would think that placing additional licenses and personal copyrights on the transformations will inhibit the overall effort, not contribute to it. [dd] I agree. putting ownership claims on everything either entails that people haven't contributed the material to begin with, or that they have under the wrong impression, in which case they should not have submitted to begin with. > With the IPR still being fuzzy, I'd prefer to try to keep sole authorship at this time and I'd prefer to complete my intended scope before opening it up for contributions. > [mb] This approach is tying our hands. The test suite effort is supposed to be public, with contributions from anyone who is interested. Much more can be accomplished if we help each other. [dd] I actually thought of this as well. However, what would this mean? That we give the copyright of the idea to generate the schema to X-hive, the copyright to the tests to NIST, the copyright to the stylesheet for generating the DOM TS ML to Curt, and so on? To what degree would we then have a test suite? > I should be able to make the code JUnit independent, however test classes will require that the base class, DOMTestCase, provide JUnit-like functions such as assertTrue, assertFalse, etc in addition > to implementing utility functions like load, implementation, wait, etc. > [mb] I would expect that these functions would be implemented as part of the transformation, given that they will have to be done for each language. There can be a set of helper functions that get created for each language, and are then called -- which makes for good coding practice, but requires that these functions be available along with the tests, or the logic can be inlined in the transformation -- which makes for stand-alone tests, and fits in with contributions coming from many places. --Mary > >
Received on Friday, 15 June 2001 09:04:00 UTC