On Mon, Sep 29, 2008 at 7:39 AM, Vamsavardhana Reddy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:
> > > On Fri, Sep 26, 2008 at 8:31 PM, Simon Laws <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote: > >> >> >> On Fri, Sep 26, 2008 at 11:20 AM, Simon Laws <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote: >> >>> >>> >>> On Fri, Sep 26, 2008 at 10:52 AM, Luciano Resende <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote: >>> >>>> I was under the impression that sca.tld [1] was comming from SCA >>>> specification. In this case, should it have the Apache License header >>>> on it ? >>>> >>>> [1] >>>> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/tuscany/java/sca/modules/host-webapp/src/main/resources/META-INF/sca.tld >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Luciano Resende >>>> Apache Tuscany, Apache PhotArk >>>> http://people.apache.org/~lresende<http://people.apache.org/%7Elresende> >>>> http://lresende.blogspot.com/ >>>> >>> >>> Good point, it comes substantially (there are some Tuscany specific parts >>> of if) from the OSOA JEE Integration Specification so it should have the >>> attributions and license associated with it as defined in the specification. >>> sca.tld is not one of the artifacts available from >>> http://www.osoa.org/xmlns/sca/1.0/ so I expect we need to treat it as a >>> portion of the spec that has been copied. >>> >>> The license in the specification [1] doesn't give specific permission to >>> construct derviative works of the specification so this gives us a problem >>> w.r.t the changes that we need to make. In lieu of immediate changes to the >>> specification this would be easier if sca.tld were made available at >>> http://www.osoa.org/xmlns/sca/1.0/. Thoughts? >>> >>> As an aside is the addition of <rtexprval> something we should raise >>> with OASIS or is it specific to our implementation? >>> >>> Regards >>> >>> Simon >>> >>> [1] >>> http://www.osoa.org/download/attachments/35/SCA_JAVAEE_Integration_V100.pdf?version=1 >>> >> >> I've raised TUSCANY-2620 to fix this for 1.3.2. I think the derivation >> point is not so problematic as this particular part of the spec is marked, >> in places, indicating that implementation specific aspects will be present. >> I'll go ahead and change the license to the OSOA spec license. Going forward >> we do need to decide what to do about <rtexprval> w.r.t the OASIS >> specifications. >> >> Simon >> > As Raymond pointed out in [2], it appears sca.tld is not compliant with > web-jsptaglibrary_2_1.xsd. I will raise an issue with OASIS SCA-J-JEE > Subcommittee. > > ++Vamsi > > [2] http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg01952.html > > Thanks Vamsi, that would be a great help. Simon
