g...@sourceauditor.com:
> - Do we agree the "OR-MAYBE" should be added?
I agree, and I prefer OR-MAYBE (I didn't come up with it).
It's more general AND its meaning is more obvious.
My congrats to whoever created it, I think it was W. Trevor King.
> - Should we disallow "OR-MAYBE" in declared license fields (it would only be
> used in concluded license fields)?
No. Projects sometimes get inherited from others
where the license isn't clear to start with, so it needs to be *possible* to
declare ambiguities.
Of course, a *declaration* using "OR MAYBE" should concerning, but that helps
potential
users know where to dig in.
> - What is the exact definition of the "OR-MAYBE" we would include in the spec?
For "OR MAYBE", in the definition of compound-expression, change:
compound-expression "OR" compound-expression ) /
to:
compound-expression "OR" ["MAYBE"] compound-expression ) /
If you want a MAYBE prefix to be allowed anywhere, you could change:
compound-expression = 1*1(simple-expression /
to:
compound-expression = ["MAYBE"] 1*1(simple-expression /
The latter allows MAYBE as a prefix in general, in case you have no confidence
in *anything*.
I can't be on the 10am call, sorry!
--- David A. Wheeler
_______________________________________________
Spdx-tech mailing list
Spdx-tech@lists.spdx.org
https://lists.spdx.org/mailman/listinfo/spdx-tech
