Hi, Gary and all, In attempting to document the correct way of expressing SPDX license expressions in RDF (https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Tu2wopYrYc4_H4KroypXUa3esYBWR2dzzwOZCj9mstk/edit#), I’ve noticed there’s this rich syntax around license expressions that isn’t documented at all. Here’s a sample element based on the output of SPDX tools, with some questions below:
<rdf:Description rdf:about="http://example.org#SPDXRef-ButIdDontWantToException";> <rdfs:comment>This exception may be invalid in some jurisdictions.</rdfs:comment> <rdfs:seeAlso>http://dilbert.com/strip/1997-01-15</rdfs:seeAlso> <spdx:example>So this one time, I had a license exception…</spdx:example> <spdx:licenseExceptionText>A user of this software may decline to follow any subset of the terms of this license at his/her pleasure. </spdx:licenseExceptionText> <spdx:name>"But I Don't Want To" Exception</spdx:name> <spdx:licenseExceptionId>SPDXRef-ButIdDontWantToException</spdx:licenseExceptionId> <rdf:type rdf:resource="http://spdx.org/rdf/terms#LicenseException"/> </rdf:Description> 1. What’s the intent of the example field? Can anyone give an, ahem, example of how it might be used? The OWL comment is not particularly illustrative: "Text for examples in describing an SPDX element." 2. The OWL description for licenseExceptionId is "A human readable short form license exception identifier for a license. The license ID is iether on the standard license oist or the form "LicenseRef-"[idString] where [idString] is a unique string containing letters, numbers, ".", "-" or "+”.". First, we should probably fix the spelling and the grammar. Second, if this is this ID of the license to which the exception applies, why not call this field “licenseId”? And third, the spec contains the following language under “EXCEPTION (‘WITH’) OPERATOR” (Appendix IV): If the applicable exception is not found on the SPDX License Exception List, then use a single <license-ref> to represent the entire license terms (including the exception). Wouldn’t that mean that this field should always contain a standard License List identifier rather than a license ref? Thanks. Yev [cid:7EA68D51-363B-4FAD-A939-D9CD926D70AB] Yev Bronshteyn Senior Software Engineer Black Duck Software<http://www.blackducksoftware.com/>
_______________________________________________ Spdx-tech mailing list [email protected] https://lists.spdx.org/mailman/listinfo/spdx-tech
