Thanks Kris! Regarding Gary’s comment about input format and the additional tags for fields in the spreadsheet - I got a bit cheeky and just added a suggestion for the missing ones (url, notes, psi-approved) to your MASTER example and the explanations below but not to the MATCHING FORMAT (to make it easier to see the difference).
I also added them to the definition of tags list as well (with my initial next to them, again to call out what I have messed up, er, added to your work). Although much of the definitions of these fields is already written (here, see bottom of page: http://spdx.org/spdx-license-list/license-list-overview <http://spdx.org/spdx-license-list/license-list-overview>) so we can probably easily collapse/combine that info with the tag explanation as one. As for the matching guidelines, I’m thinking those can probably be revised a bit more or be more explicit… it looks like you updated the statements as to whether markup is included in the template or not, as appropriate. But I wonder if the explanation of the tags could be incorporated into the matching guidelines (I may have just contradicted my previous paragraph - thinking whilst typing…) IN any case, hope to have some time on the legal call tomorrow to discuss! (agenda coming soon) Jilayne SPDX Legal Team co-lead [email protected] > On Mar 1, 2016, at 1:33 PM, Kris.re <[email protected]> wrote: > > As long as there is a build process we can name them whatever we want; I was > referring more to the structure of them (for example, in my initial proposal > the ‘bullet’ tag was just an empty element, not retaining the initial value… > but now I’m suggesting we instead retain the initial text. Same for the > ‘synonym’ tag). Do you have specific items on your hit list? Any proposal > about what to do with tags that may not exist in the spec? > > Re: extra columns, sure. I can go through and extend the current data as > appropriate, will try and work in some time to do that. > > Kris > > From: Gary O'Neall [mailto:[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>] > Sent: Tuesday, March 01, 2016 12:47 > To: Kris.re <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>; > [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>; 'SPDX-legal' > <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> > Subject: RE: Updated templates > > Thanks Kris! > > Good progress on the formats and licenses (as well as some interesting > findings on the existing license texts). > > Just a couple comments related to format. > > Input format: > In order to do away with the spreadsheet, we'll need a few more tags to > represent all of the columns (e.g. OSI approved, other web pages for the > license, notes). > > Output format: > I would propose the property names in the output format to be consistent with > the spec for consistency. If we want the output XML format to be consistent > with the input format, we may want to change the names of the properties on > the input format to make the entire set of formats use consistent terms. > > Gary > > From: [email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]> > [mailto:[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>] On Behalf Of Kris.re > Sent: Monday, February 29, 2016 4:43 PM > To: [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>; 'SPDX-legal' > Subject: Updated templates > > Hello folks. The results of my second pass at converting the license list can > be found here: > > https://github.com/myndzi/license-list/tree/xml-test/src > <https://github.com/myndzi/license-list/tree/xml-test/src> > > Notably, I was a lot more aggressive with what qualifies as optional text. > The substantive body text of the licenses is no longer wrapped in any markup; > instead, the entire license body is wrapped in the <body> tag, and the > optional sections are nested inside. Optional sections should be taken to > mean optional *for the purpose of matching*; they may contain text that is > not optional for the purpose of actually utilizing the license. This was hard > to decide on in a few cases with preamble sections, for example, and is > probably not consistent in its treatment through every license. > > I ran into a few strange cases and marked many of them with the ‘review’ > comment tag at the top of the file as before. I also noticed a few license > templates that actually include multiple licenses concatenated together; I am > uncertain how these should be dealt with, particularly with regards to > copyright notices in the “second” license and so forth. In one case (open > ssl, including the ssleay license text in whole) this may have been a > requirement of the license for the library the software was based on, but at > least one other case (I’m sorry: I don’t remember specifically which one) it > seemed more like things were just thrown together. > > I noticed that the PHP license includes a reference to the Zend framework, > though there is a separate Zend license. > > There are a few times where the license text proper has been interrupted by > an optional tag; that is to say, the meaningful text is not all one piece in > every license. For the purposes of matching, this may be difficult to resolve > – if you say that optional tags may be matched in an “all or nothing” manner, > you will fail to match in cases where the interleaved “optional” text is in > the form of a copyright notice which has been changed; marking these out as > alt text may be the correct solution. > > I also updated the wiki: > > http://wiki.spdx.org/view/Legal_Team/Templatizing/tags-matching > <http://wiki.spdx.org/view/Legal_Team/Templatizing/tags-matching> > > I’ve outlined the general structure of the XML files here, as well as revised > my original proposal to make the master and matching formats almost identical. > > I edited the matching guidelines to identify the ones that would change, > though I imagine the text I included could do to be revised. Applicable > sections are 7 through 12. > > Please have a look if you’re interested and share feedback. > > Kris > _______________________________________________ > Spdx-legal mailing list > [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > https://lists.spdx.org/mailman/listinfo/spdx-legal > <https://lists.spdx.org/mailman/listinfo/spdx-legal>
_______________________________________________ Spdx-tech mailing list [email protected] https://lists.spdx.org/mailman/listinfo/spdx-tech
