Re: Early XSLT's

"Arnold, Curt" wrote:
> 
> Thanks for the clarification, Philippe.  The software license with the caveats
> seems just about the right balance between maintaining the sanctity of the
> test suite and enabling reasonable use of it.
>
> I'd like clarifications on the following:
> 
> 1. The contribution grant statement
> 
> I definitely have no problem with this.  Is there a specific
> form that you would like this in and where should I mail it?

replaced [Submitter] appropriately and then send the paragraph back to the
mailing list.
---------------
 Declaration of [Submitter]

   [Submitter] hereby grants to the W3C, a perpetual,
   nonexclusive, royalty-free, world-wide right and license under any
   [Submitter] copyrights in this contribution to copy, publish and
   distribute the contribution, as well as a right and license of the
   same scope to any derivative works prepared by the W3C and based on,
   or incorporating all or part of the contribution. [Submitter]
   further agrees that any derivative works of this contribution prepared
   by the W3C shall be solely owned by the W3C.
--------------

> 2. Copyright notices on schemas, transforms, tests, etc.
> 
> Is this an acceptible notice to place in the transforms, schemas,
> et al (from your prior message but replaced "Document" with "Software"
> 
> /*
>  * Copyright (c) 2001 World Wide Web Consortium,
>  * (Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Institut National de
>  * Recherche en Informatique et en Automatique, Keio University). All
>  * Rights Reserved. This program is distributed under the W3C's Software
>  * Intellectual Property License. This program is distributed in the
>  * hope that it will be useful, but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even
>  * the implied warranty of MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR
>  * PURPOSE.
>  * See W3C License http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Legal/ for more details.
>  */

Yes, this is perfect.

As I said in my previous message, the Java and ECMAScript sources in the
W3C DOM Conformance Test Suites will have a slightly different license
but it doesn't prevent anybody to generate their own Java or ECMAScript
tests from the framework as long as they stay outside the org.w3c package.
As a fact, we are using almost the same copyright license for the DOM
Bindings [1]. Each Java files contains the comment above and the complete
package contains a file COPYRIGHT.html [1] (in our case, the Document license
section will be removed). As far as I know, we never had any trouble in the
past for the Java DOM bindings.

> 3. Compatibility and/or Dependency on xUnit frameworks
> 
> Compatibility with the xUnit frameworks seems very desirable.
> However, I gather from your statements that is may be a requirement
> to run independently since, for example, JUnit is licensed
> under the IBM Public License.

IBM might want to grant to the W3C the rights to use it in the W3C DOM
Conformance Test Suites. I need to check with our IBM contact if it is
possible. Also Dimitris and Mary need to decide if JUnit is suitable for the
Conformance Test Suites.

> The generated tests currently depend on their base class (DOMTestCase)
> to provide methods such as assertTrue, assertFalse, assertEquals, etc,
> that could either be inherited from junit.framework.TestCase or could
> be independently implemented.  I do not expect that the tests would
> rely on any of the fancier stuff in JUnit (such as building the test
> suite by reflection), so that it would be fairly simple to support the
> subset used by the tests.

I would suggest to have two versions, one for JUnit and one for the W3C. The
W3C version is not necessary for the moment given that our harness is not
ready.

I'm very glad to see that things are moving again on the right track,

Philippe

[1] http://www.w3.org/TR/2001/WD-DOM-Level-3-Core-20010605/copyright-notice.html

Received on Friday, 15 June 2001 17:10:25 UTC