Hi everyone,
I have two questions/remarks about the compound license expressions as
defined in SPDX 2.3 Annex D.4.
The OR is referred to as the "Disjunctive OR operator". However, as we
have a choice and would not pick two or more of such licenses, it seems
to me that it is not a "normal" disjunction but an exclusive one. I find
this distinction interesting for evaluating license equivalence
regarding distributivity.
If the OR is to be understood as a "normal" disjunction, then that would
mean both distributivities apply (AND over OR and OR over AND).
If the OR is to be understood as an exclusive disjunction, then that
would mean only one distributivity would apply. (AND over OR).
For example:
BSD-3-Clause OR (MIT AND Apache-2.0) ≡ (BSD-3-Clause OR Apache-2.0) AND
(BSD-3-Clause OR MIT) (True only for "normal" disjunction)
BSD-3-Clause AND (MIT OR Apache-2.0) ≡ (BSD-3-Clause AND Apache-2.0) OR
(BSD-3-Clause AND MIT) (True for "normal" and exclusive disjunction)
To me, the assumption of an exclusive disjunction seems to make more sense.
Questions:
1. Should the OR be understood as "normal" disjunction, exclusive
disjunction, or none of the two? Has there been any discussion or
thought on this?
2. The specification mentions the equivalence with commutation, but
nothing about transitivity or distributivity. Is there any deeper
meaning to this?
Best Regards,
Timothy
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Links: You receive all messages sent to this group.
View/Reply Online (#4930): https://lists.spdx.org/g/Spdx-tech/message/4930
Mute This Topic: https://lists.spdx.org/mt/96401230/21656
Group Owner: [email protected]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.spdx.org/g/Spdx-tech/unsub [[email protected]]
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
