- From: Lofton Henderson <lofton@rockynet.com>
- Date: Mon, 26 Apr 2004 08:34:47 -0600
- To: Dominique Hazaël-Massieux <dom@w3.org>
- Cc: www-qa-wg@w3.org
At 12:18 PM 4/26/2004 +0200, Dominique Hazaël-Massieux wrote: >Le ven 23/04/2004 à 01:04, Lofton Henderson a écrit : > > >Hmm... I'm unsure... It may better to leave it empty for now, waiting > > >for the topic to be cleared out - there have subsequent discussions > > >which make me wonder if the results of the meeting in June is still > > >relevant. Sorry not to have better references yet... > > > > I am opposed to leaving it empty completely. After a lot of effort, we > > achieved and published some results. Those have not been superseded > yet by > > anything visible to the membership (including our audience, the > Chairs). I > > think "no advice" is worse than some generic advice, like "Software > License > > or Document License, or piecewise application of same to different TS > > components." > >My fear comes from the fact that in these matters, bad advice is worse >than no advice... As I said, the issues are pretty complex, and it's >hard to get a firm answer as soon as you deal with legalese. From what I >can see, as of today, the preferred license for publishing a test suite >is the Document license ; IMO, this oversimplifies the problem and ignores some good work and mutual understandings that we reached with the ad-hoc task group. Document License (DL) has some appealing features, but doesn't always work for all bits of a test suite. SL might be needed for some parts, in order to apply the tests. Possibly different licenses for different components (core test cases, harness/framework, documentation, etc). That is the recommendation in CR OpsGL (carried forward into QAH): http://www.w3.org/TR/2003/CR-qaframe-ops-20030922/guidelines-chapter#Ck-proc-define-pub-licenses Proposal. Keep the substantive stuff in QAH until it is superseded by something better; suppress the references to Joseph's work (since it is apparently out of vogue and being redone by his successors). -Lofton. >the topics of contributions, copyright >holding, patent infringements would be good to cover as well. > >I'll try to coordinate with the person in charge tomorrow... > >Dom >-- >Dominique Hazaël-Massieux - http://www.w3.org/People/Dom/ >W3C/ERCIM >mailto:dom@w3.org >
Received on Monday, 26 April 2004 10:35:16 UTC