<<There's only one absolutely positive way to know the answer to that.>>
Ask WotC.
Let's clarify something. WotC is not the final arbiter of the OGL.
In any license there are two interpretations (one for each of the parties, in a two party license) and a potential 3rd interpretation established by a court or arbiter should the two parties' interpretations come in conflict.
WotC is not the final arbiter of things. It is a 600 lb. gorilla in the gaming industry with a team of well-paid Hasbro lawyers to back it up.
However, that doesn't mean that if the community can agree that there are vague areas in the license that need to be patched, and can agree upon a community interpretation for the license, that everyone else other than WotC can't work inside such interpretations.
In a normal licensing negotiation both parties sit down and reach an agreement. In such a circumstance there may be a single mutual interpretation for some vague items. In an open license, there is never any opportunity to negotiate the vague parts, and this tends to generate a multiplicity of interpretations more often than a standard licensing negotiation might.
The license fails utterly to smoothly handle magazines, compilations, and software. It fails in other areas too.
I for one am sick of people relying on certain WotC interpretations which clearly don't address these problem areas with anything more than handwaving. I think informed agreement among members of the community, presented to WotC in a codified format could be the basis for v. 2.0 of the license. WotC is much more likely to consider such an endeavor if:
a) it is handed to them on a plate, ready to serve up
b) a whole lot of community members have signed on to an interpretive addendum
That's my goal. I want to skeptically approach all interpretations of the license, even my own, until such time as the community can agree upon ways to interpret the vaguest parts of the license. I tend not to support any one interpretation of the most complex portions of the license. I tend to believe that there are a multiplicity of possible interpretations, and an effective safe harbor is established only between parties who agree upon those interpretations.
I think if we do some work on our own to assist in clarification then WotC will probably at least strongly consider the fruits of our labors. I don't think that WotC has been very adversarial on most points of the license, but nor have they been very willing to patch up the cracks in the dike either.
Lee
