Wow - Thanks for the detailed response! The problem in #7 is what I noticed.
I kept it as an optional field in the XSD - so all the licenses validate. Looking forward to telcon on Tuesday. N On Thu, Jun 14, 2018 at 3:46 PM W. Trevor King <[email protected]> wrote: > On Tue, Jun 12, 2018 at 09:59:05AM -0700, James Neushul wrote: > > 1. What's up with "IsFsfLibre" .. it's in lots of licences but not > > in SPDX.rdf > > The FSF wanted that information in our published license list [1], > where we'd have an existing "OSI Approved?" column. There was lots of > discussion about how to maintain the data [2, among other places]. > The current approach has the data in [3]. That data is pulled by the > publisher [4] which generates [1] and [5]. There are open issues > about getting the field documented in downstream locations [6,7]. > > Cheers, > Trevor > > [1]: https://spdx.org/licenses/ > [2]: https://github.com/spdx/license-list-XML/pull/453 > [3]: https://github.com/wking/fsf-api > [4]: https://github.com/spdx/LicenseListPublisher > [5]: https://github.com/spdx/license-list-data > [6]: https://github.com/spdx/license-list-data/issues/14 > [7]: https://github.com/spdx/spdx-spec/issues/46 > > -- > This email may be signed or encrypted with GnuPG (http://www.gnupg.org). > For more information, see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pretty_Good_Privacy > -- JDN -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#3603): https://lists.spdx.org/g/Spdx-tech/message/3603 Mute This Topic: https://lists.spdx.org/mt/22083221/21656 Group Owner: [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://lists.spdx.org/g/Spdx-tech/unsub [[email protected]] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
