<<I happen to agree with Scott on this --
BPI1001 CITYSCAPE: CITY ON THE NEXUS OF THE OMNIVERSE (d20)
BPI1002 CORPORATE SUPERS
These seem perfectly reasonable to me.
>>
The problem may be that if some of these codes include the TM of the publisher directly in the code like
"TSR11550" for (just using it as a random example), then it could be argued that you are directly using an OGC publisher's trademark (TSR) in a source citation. That's the advantage of a publisher number and a completely numerical product designation (either unique to the system or an ISBN) -- they are numerical designations stripped of alphabetical characters that might coincide directly with a trademark.
If the citation is used without extensive explanation, if no compatibility is suggested, and if the citation code is stripped of TM-specific info, then it'll very likely be OGL compliant.
The SKU is a fine idea, but I am not sure that we can guarantee OGL compliance for all vendor's SKUs, particularly not for those who include their trademarks directly in their SKUs. Perhaps TSR is unique.
The distributors and store owner's on the list can probably speak to this.
Lee
