Hi Nuno,
Thanks for the feedback.
Very good point - I agree that the data license really isn't the same term
as concluded.
The source of the issue relates to the class structure on the SPDX 2.0
model.
I am now thinking we should introduce another class to solve this (plus a
few other issues).
All:
We could add a class which is a superclass of both SpdxElement and
SpdxDocument - let's just call it an SpdxThing for now.
The relationship would be between SpdxThings and the relationship would be a
property of SpdxThing:
+--------------+
| SpdxThing |<-+
| --------- | |
| relationship |--+
+--------------+
|
|
+-----+-----+
| |
V V
+--------------+ +-------------+
| SpdxDocument | | SpdxElement |
| ... | | ... |
+--------------+ +-------------+
|
V
File, Package, Snippet (same
subclass structure)
Let me know what you think.
Gary
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email protected] [mailto:spdx-tech-
> [email protected]] On Behalf Of Nuno Brito
> Sent: Friday, March 14, 2014 2:30 AM
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: Compatibility analysis based on the RDF terms for SPDX 2.0
>
> Hi Gary (and everyone),
>
> In regards to this message:
>
> > Below is a summary of the changes:
> > - 41 fields are unchanged from SPDX 1.2
> > - 17 fields are new
> > - 9 potential incompatible fields
>
> Thanks for sharing the excel list.
>
> From the excel list I see the DataLicense field proposed to be
> deprecated or that we use LicenseDeclared in alternative.
>
> From what I understood, the LicenseDeclared field applies to the
> software being listed but not the rights over SPDX document itself like
> DataLicense.
>
> In the EU exists the sui-generis database rights (likely not yet not
> available in the US), which protects a person's right to share a
> collection of SPDX documents with a legal instrument to prevent
> competing sites from simply crawling/copying the information available
> to public and then re-brand as their own without permission.
>
> The CC-BY-4.0 [2] license reflects the sui-generis rights and I've been
> using this license on SPDX documents [3] to ensure they can be shared
> with public. I'm using the DataLicense field to express the license
> terms for the SPDX document itself.
>
>
> Just wanted to share some feedback. Thanks for the consideration.
>
>
> With kind regards,
> Nuno Brito
>
> [1]
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sui_generis_database_right#European_Union
> [2] http://wiki.creativecommons.org/4.0/Sui_generis_database_rights
> [3]
> https://opensourceprojects.eu/p/triplecheck/code/23/tree/tool/run/produ
> cts/jfreechart-1.0.17.tar.gz.spdx
>
>
> ---
> email: [email protected]
> phone: +49 615 146 03187
> _______________________________________________
> Spdx-tech mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.spdx.org/mailman/listinfo/spdx-tech
_______________________________________________
Spdx-tech mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.spdx.org/mailman/listinfo/spdx-tech
