Re: DOM, Promises, and licensing

On Fri, Jul 12, 2013 at 7:24 PM, Jeff Jaffe <jeff@w3.org> wrote:

>  On 7/12/2013 2:16 PM, Alex Russell wrote:
>
> I think this is all misdirection from the core question:
>
>  Jeff: did you express that view to Anne?
>
>
> I'm not sure I understand which view you are talking about.  I've
> certainly expressed the view that the W3C Document License does not permit
> forking.  Is that what you are asking?
>
>
To quote Anne:

"...per your understanding of the W3C Member Agreement I could not be a
Member of the W3C WebApps WG, push snapshots to TR/, while simultaneously
edit http://dom.spec.whatwg.org/ This generalizes to other documents I work
on as I understand it."

This would have several follow-ons if it's accurate:

   1. Why do you believe that the WHATWG document is a fork in any way from
   the W3C document?
   2. If it can be shown not to be, do you drop your objection (assuming
   you do object)?
   3. Do you accept that if drafts are published at the WHATWG first and
   are then copied into W3C documents that this does not constitute any sort
   of "forking" or creation of a derivative on the part of the member doing
   this?

The point you make about the W3C license might not even be apropos
depending on your responses to the above.

>   And is it not based on an *opinion* of the policies in effect with
> regards to derivitive works in this area? Is it really necessary to ask the
> AC to change the Team's opinion on this?
>
>
> Again, don't understand.  It is not an opinion that our current license
> does not permit forking.
>

It is the opinion of W3C lawyers *if/how Anne's actions would constitute
forking *which is under discussion.

>  Anne: can you make the formal request per the rule there?
>
>  Jeff: assuming he does, can you please advise on a timeframe for getting
> a response?
>
>
> On Fri, Jul 12, 2013 at 7:08 PM, Jeff Jaffe <jeff@w3.org> wrote:
>
>>  On 7/12/2013 2:02 PM, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
>>
>>> On Fri, Jul 12, 2013 at 1:46 PM, Jeff Jaffe <jeff@w3.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>> First, if Anne has a request, I would like to hear his request.  I don't
>>>> want to hypothetically guess his request and respond to all possible
>>>> interpretations.
>>>>
>>> Alex asked why DOM in W3C was not updated. I told him that per your
>>> understanding of the W3C Member Agreement I could not be a Member of
>>> the W3C WebApps WG, push snapshots to TR/, while simultaneously edit
>>> http://dom.spec.whatwg.org/ This generalizes to other documents I work
>>> on as I understand it.
>>>
>>> I cannot speak for WHATWG (no space), but I personally would not want
>>> to edit anything that cannot be forked.
>>>
>>
>>  As we've discussed many times, at a personal level I respect your
>> decision not to work on documents that cannot be forked, even though it
>> disappoints me from a W3C point of view.
>>
>> I've also said that over time I'm hopeful that we get to a point that we
>> have an evolved consensus in this area.
>>
>> First step - still not a done deal - is the revision of the HTML5 Charter
>> and forking for extension specifications.
>>
>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> http://annevankesteren.nl/
>>>
>>
>>
>
>