Working on the resume builder edition has made me think about tiddlywiki and licensing in the context of an extensible single page application. From what I have seen none of the existing software licenses cover the cases of a plugin architecture in a single page application. For most current plugins the authors seem to be at least comfortable with the idea of their work being free software <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_software>, I think this is a good thing and, if a license is needed, I want plugins I make to have a permissive license.
The problem as I see it comes in when you consider that TiddlyWiki can be used to make creative works where there should be some distinction between tiddlywiki as the container and the content created. The license currently says Redistribution and use in source and binary forms, with or without modification, are permitted provided that the following conditions are met: Redistributions of source code must retain the above copyright notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer. Redistributions in binary form must reproduce the above copyright notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer in the documentation and/or other materials provided with the distribution. which, as far as the TiddlyWiki core itself is concerned is a good thing in my opinion. But in the case of the resume builder, since tiddlywiki is a single page application, the license would apply to the content (your resume) as well which is probably not a desirable situation. For the resume builder this isn't really a problem because it would most likely be used offline and the output would presumably be a pdf which wouldn't be subject to the same license, but for something like the interactive fiction engine I made there isn't any way using the currently available software licenses to make a distinction between the tool and a game that someone makes using the tool. I would like TiddlyWiki to be usable as an authoring tool for creative content, and I would like the authors of that content to be able to use their work in a commercial context, but unless some distinction is made between tiddlywiki and content created using tiddlywiki than that isn't practical. I think that it would make sense in terms of creative control to be able to distinguish between the tiddlywiki core, plugins, and wiki content for the purposes of licensing. This also comes up because, while I don't think that it really grants or removes any user rights compared to those given by the tiddlywiki license, I would like to give the content of the wiki reference wiki a creative commons license just so there isn't any question about people being able to use or copy what I put on it. I don't think that we have anyone who is familiar with the legal issues surrounding this, but if anyone does know I would be interested to hear about if separating the different parts of tiddlywiki like this would be possible. I wrote some other thoughts about this and the problems making a distinction between the different parts of tiddlywiki here <http://inmysocks.tiddlyspot.com/#Thoughts%20about%20TiddlyWiki%20and%20Licensing> . -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TiddlyWiki" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/tiddlywiki. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tiddlywiki/b1ebc8a2-1248-492c-af5a-695b1998ad92%40googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
